MASTER 

NEGATIVE 
NO.  91-80399 


MICROFILMED  1991 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES/NEW  YORK 


as  part  of  the 
Foundations  of  Western  Civilization  Preservation  Project" 


Funded  by  the 
NATIONAL  ENDOWMENT  FOR  THE  HUMANITIES 


Reproductions  may  not  be  made  without  permission  from 

Columbia  University  Library 


COPYRIGHT  STATEMENT 

The  copyright  law  of  the  United  States  -  Title  17,  United 
States  Code  -  concerns  the  making  of  photocopies  or  other 
reproductions  of  copyrighted  material... 

Columbia  University  Library  reserves  the  right  to  refuse  to 
accept  a  copy  order  if,  in  its  judgement,  fulfillment  of  the  order 
would  involve  violation  of  the  copyright  law. 


AUTHOR: 


STRANGE,  THOMAS 
LUMISDEN 


TITLE: 


BIBLE;  IS  IT  "THE  WORD 
OF  GOD?" 

PLACE: 

LONDON 

DA  TE : 

1871 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES 
PRESERVATION  DEPARTMENT 

BTRT  TOGR  APHTr  MTCROFORM  TARGET 


Master  Negative  # 


Restrictions  on  Use: 


Original  Material  as  Filmed  -  Existing  Bibliographic  Record 


f;    .    «    ij»%^.-i  «■        '-••*■ 


211.01 


Gt8 


Strange »  Thomas  Liunisden ,  . 

The  Bible;  is  it   "the'TJord  of.  God?"  By  Thorns 
Lumisden  Strange...       London,  Triibner ,  1871. 


xi,   381  p.       2Zir  cm. 


u 


TECHNICAL  MICROFORM  DATA 

FILM     SIZE:__J^^ __  REDUCTION     RATIO:__j^^^ 

IMAGE  PLACEMENT:    lA    <0     IB     IIB 

DATE     FILMED: lifj^2J3.L INITIALS___-^^^        

HLMEDBY:    RESEARCH  PTTRT.TCATIONS-  TNC  WOODBRIDGE,  CT 


c 


Association  for  information  and  Image  IManagement 

1100  Wayne  Avenue.  Suite  1100 
Silver  Spring,  Maryland  20910 

301/587-8202 


Centimeter 

1         2        3 


u 


5 

iiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiii 


TTT 


4 

mill 


8 


T 


1 1 1 1 1 1 


liiiiiiiiiliiiiiiiiil 


TTT 


IIJ 


iU 


10 

Mill 


TTT 


11        12       13       14 

lllllll[lill|llli|Mllllllllll   llll| 


15    mm 


T 


Inches 


.0 


I.I 


1.25 


IIM     2.8 

25 

i^ 

1^    M 

2.2 

|63 

^       ill  4  0 

lis.      i^ 

2.0 

ta. 

*i^     u 

hiUU 

1.8 

1.4 

1.6 

MflNUFfiCTURED   TO   fillM   STfiNDflRDS 
BY   APPLIED   IMRGE,     INC. 


/ 


Columbia  (BnitJf  rs(itp 


LIBRARY 


f 


THE   BIBLE; 


IS  IT 


"THE  WORD  OF  GOD?" 


BY 


THOMA'S  LUMISDEN  STRANGE, 


LATE  A  JUDGE  OF  THE  HIGH  CODKT  OF  MADKAS. 


LONDON: 
N.  TRUBNER  &  CO.,  60  PATERNOSTER  ROW. 

MDCCCLXXI. 


[All  rights  reserved."] 


k 


**  It  is  more  honourable  to  see  wisely  what  is  presented  for  observation,  than 
to  believe  there  can  be  anything  worthy  to  be  called  sound  judgment  in 
refusing  to  see  it."— Baldwin  on  Pre-Historto  Nations,  351. 


\m 


n 


PREFACE. 


The  question  placed  upon  my  title  page  is  one  that  should  not 
be  difficult  to  reply  to,  nor  provoke  serious  difference  of  judg- 
ment.    The  divine  being  is  so  immeasurably  superior  in  the 
faculties  possessed  by  the  human  race,  that  in  estimating  any 
work  that   possibly  may  be  common  to   him  and   man,   the 
marks  of  distinction  between  the  product  of  the  infallible  and 
perfect  workman,  and  that  of  the  fallible  and   imperfect  one, 
should  be  readily  discernible.      The  conflict  of  opinion  that 
has  arisen  on  the  pretensions  of  the  Bible  to  be  of  divine 
origin   is   owing,    not  to  the  matter  to  be  judged  being  ill 
defined  or  obscure,  but  because,   commonly,  the  question  is 
settled,   in  the  affirmative,  without  examination.     That  this 
book  is  the  very  word  of  God,  is  an  opinion  formed  for  us  in 
our  childhood,  and  early  impressions,  whatever  their  character, 
take  firm  hold.    A  twig  to  which  an  artificial  form  has  been  given 
in  the  days  of  its  pliancy,  defies  the  efforts  made  at  a  later 
time  to  bring  it  back  to  its  natural  shape.     And  it  is  with 
such  a  warp  on  the  judgment  that  in  Christian  lands  the  in- 
vestigation of  the  authority  of  the  Bible  must  be  taken  up,  if 
indeed  ever  entered  upon.     But  with  the  great  body  the  con- 
viction induced  in  youth  is  the  final  one,  the  mind  resenting 
any  attempt  to  interfere  with  its  cherished  belief.     Those  who 
have  depended  all  their  lives  on  corks  or  crutches,  naturally 
are  afraid  to  trust  to  their  own  proper  unaided  powers,  and  to 


\» 


IV 


PREFACE. 


the  unused  senses,  to  contemplate  life  without  a  recorded  re- 
velation from  God,  is  as  formidable  as  would  be  the  pro- 
position to  float  in  air,  or  navigate  the  ocean,  without  material 

support. 

The  Bible  consists  of  facts  and  doctrine.  The  doctrine  may 
be  tried  by  its  moral  consequences,  but  the  facts  must  neces- 
sarily be  established,  in  the  universal  manner,  by  evidence  of 
their  occurrence.  The  doctrine,  however  beneficial  and  true, 
cannot,  of  itself,  give  currency  to  the  fact.  Assuming,  for 
example,  that  it  is  a  wholesome  idea  that  we  should  have  a 
mediator  to  stand  between  ourselves  and  God,  it  still  becomes 
necessary  to  ascertain  who  that  mediator  may  be  ;  and  this 
can  only  be  done  by  examining  the  pretensions  of  whoever 
may  offer  himself  to  fill  this  place,  by  judging  of  the  state- 
ments given  concerning  him.  We  are  told  that  there  may 
be  "false  christs,"  that  ''Satan  himself"  may  be  "trans- 
formed into  an  angel  of  light,"  and  "  his  ministers  as  the 
ministers  of  righteousness  ;"  and  by  this  test  of  the  evidence 
the  imputed  author  of  Christianity,  in  fact,  has  elected  to 
stand,  saying,  "  The  same  works  that  I  do,  bear  witness  of 
me,  that  the  Father  hath  sent  me."  "If  I  do  not  the  works 
of  my  Father,  believe  me  not.  But  if  I  do,  though  ye  be- 
lieve not  me,  believe  the  works." 

However  unpleasant  it  may  be  to  the  great  body  of  profess- 
ino"  Christians  to  have  opinions  they  have  long  maintained 
subjected  to  questioning  and  examination,  the  process,  at  all 
events,  is  one  not  discountenanced,  but  encouraged,  by  the  book 
they  appeal  to  as  the  divine  support  of  their  convictions.  And 
in  the  nature  of  the  objects  presented  in  this  book  for  recep- 
tion, such  an  examination  is  necessary  to  warrant  the  faith 
therein  invited.  This  is  the  task  I  have  now  undertaken. 
Having:  long  lived  under  the  sense  that  the  Bible  revelations 


PREFACE.  V 

were  "  the  power  of  God  unto  salvation,"  and  been  brought  at 
length,  through  the  force  of  facts,  to  question  their  divine 
authority,  now,  that  through  study  of  this  momentous  subject, 
every  doubt  and  difficulty  that  obscured  my  own  mind  has  been 
removed,  I  have  the  natural  desire  to  make  the  fruits  of  my 
researches  available  to  others. 

I  have  cast  my  observations  in  the  shape  of  a  conversation 
with  an  educated  person,  free  of  his  former  religious  persua- 
sions, and  in  search  of  a  true  creed,  and  have  adopted  this 
form  in  order  the  better  to  open  out  the  subject  from  its  basis, 
and  to  exhibit  the  testimony  as  it  might  present  itself  to  a 
mind  uninfluenced  by  prior  conceptions.  In  so  doing  I  have 
felt  free  to  use  the  Bible  just  as  it  is  presented  to  us  for  ordi- 
nary use.  It  is  the  authorised  version,  as  rendered  into  our 
own  language,  which  is  the  standard  of  the  Englishman's 
faith,  and  I  have  not  sought  to  account  for,  qualify,  or  accom- 
modate, any  part  of  its  communications,  by  resort  to  critical 
limitations. 

Such  being  the  method  employed,  the  present  effort  is 
necessarily  restricted  in  its  range,  embracing  only  what  relates 
to  the  history  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  and  the  sup- 
port claimed  for  them  by  agency  superhuman,  and  therefore 
professing  to  be  divine.  This  includes  the  miracles  and  mar- 
vels proper,  the  prophecies,  and  the  miraculous  history  of  Jesus. 
There  is  much  else,  bearing  upon  the  same  point,  whether  the 
book  is  traceable  to  God  or  man,  upon  which  I  do  not  now 
touch  ;  such  as  the  accounts  of  the  creation,  fall,  and  deluge  ; 
the  antiquity  of  the  human  race;  the  manifestations  of  the  being 
and  attributes  of  the  Divinity ;  the  doctrinal  teachings  ;  the 
revelations  respecting  the  future  state ;  and  the  Oriental  legends, 
a  knowledge  of  which  gives  the  key  to  the  whole  mystery. 

The  ground  at  present  occupied  by  me  is  already,  for  the 


MMisiaM 


PREFACE. 
VI 

xnost  part,  well  trodden.     But  it  is  needful,  to  any  deeper 

•  inquiries,  that  the  foundations  I  have  explored  should  be  exhi- 

hited  and  properly  understood.     I  have   the  hope  that  the 

labours  of  every  earnest  and  serious  student  in  this  field  rnay 

still  be  acceptable.     The  warfare  with  surrounding  prejudice 

is  a  continuous  one,  and  any  ray  of  light  should  be  welcome 

that  may  serve  to  pierce  the  prevailing  mists  which  disguise, 

distort,  and  veil  the  truth. 


Gkeat  Malvern,  March  1871. 


CONTENTS. 


I.— THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 


Inspiration  of  Book,    . 
Language  of  Book, 
Custody  of  Book, 
The  Ark,    .... 
Promulgation  of  Book, 
Discovery  of  Book, 
Observance  of  the  Law, 
Effects  of  discovery  of  Book, 
Ezra's  production  of  Book, 
Earliest  versions,        .         • 


Page 
1 
2 
4 
4 
5 
7 
7 

13 
14 
15 


Authorship  of  Pentateuch, 
Ezra's  publication,      . 
Book  of  Joshua, 
Book  of  Judges, 
Book  of  Ruth,     . 
Books  of  Samuel, 
Books  of  Kings, 
Unity  of  authorship, 
Evidence  of  compilation. 
Prior  records  made  use  of, 


Page 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
20 
20 
20 
21 
25 


II. — THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


T 


t 


Authorship  of  gospels. 
Gospels,  when  first  known  of,     . 
Inspiration  of  gospels, 
Apocryphal  writings, 
Correspondence    of      synoptical 

gospels,   .        .         •         •         • 
Relative  support  of  gospels. 
Gospel  according  to  John, 
Authorship  of  John's  gospel. 
The  Paschal  controversy,   . 
Evidences  of  late  authorship  of 

gospels,   .        .         •         •         • 
Traces  of  dependence  on  earlier 

records,  .        .        •        •        • 


27 
27 
30 
32 

34 
41 
41 
42 
45 

46 

48 


m 


Book  of  Enoch,  .        .        • 

Book  of  Acts, 

The  Epistles, 

Collection  of  Epistles  incomplete. 

Inspiration  of  Paul's  Epistles, 

Formation  of  canon,   . 

Scriptures    that    are    called 

question. 
Origin  of  canon, 
Transmission  of  text. 
Earliest  manuscripts, 
Citations  of  Old  Testament, 
Discernment  of  word  of  God  in 

scriptures,       .        •        •         • 


Evidence  to  miracles. 

Test  of  divinely  wrought  miracles, 

Lying  miracles. 

Combination    of    miracles    and 
doctrine,         .         .        •        • 


III. — MIRACLES. 

64  I  Account   of    the    miracles    and 


66 
66 

68 


marvels. 
Miracles  with  animals, 

. ■  with  water, 

with  fixe,    . 


50 
55 
55 
56 
57 
57 

58 
60 
60 
61 
61 

62 


71 
71 
72 
72 


Vlll 


CONTENTS. 


Miracles  with  food,    . 
Miscellaneous  miracles, 
Curing  fever, 

palsy, 

leprosy, 

blindness,    . 

dumbness, 

maiming,    . 

lameness,    . 

Casting  out  evil  spirits, 
Raising  the  dead, 
Healing  multitudes,   . 
Miracles  wrought  with  inanimate 

substances. 
Inquiring    of 


God 
Thummim,  &c., 
by  prophets. 


by   Urim, 


Answers  from  God  refused. 
Direct  communication  with  God, 
Visitation  by  dreams.  Old  Testa- 
ment,      ..... 


Page 
73 

74 
76 
77 
77 
77 
78 
79 
79 
79 
80 
82 

82 

83 
84 
86 
87 

87 


Visitation  by  dreams,  New  Tes 

tament,  .... 
Fallacious  dreams. 
Visions,  Old  Testament,     . 
Visions,  New  Testament,  . 
False  visions. 
Apparitions  of  angels.  Old  Testa 

ment,  .... 
Apparitions    of     angels,     New 

Testament, 
Evil  angels, 

Satan,  ,         .        .         . 

Apparitions  of  God,  Old  Testa 

ment,  .... 
Apparitions  of  God,  New  Testa 

ment,  .... 
Jesus  manifested  as  God,  . 
Miracles  connected  with  person 

of  Jesus, 
Acceptance  of  miracles, 
Liberty  of  judgment, 


IV. — MIRACLES  CONTINUED. 


General  remarks. 

The  serpent  in  Eden, 

Balaam's  ass. 

Lions,  bears,  and  ravens, 

Jonah  and  the  whale, 

The  Exodus,  narrative, 

General  criticisms. 

Further  criticisms, 

The  course  by  the  Red  Sea 

Conflict  with  Amalekites, 

Spying  out  the  land,  . 

Forty  years  in  the  wilderness, 

Object  of  scheme  of  occupation 

of  Canaan, 
Egyptian  accounts,     . 
The  Hyksos, 

Silence  of  Egyptian  records, 
Miscellaneous  miracles, 


Celestial  fire  consuming  sacrifices,  135 
Judgments  by  celestial  fire,  .  136 
Walls  of  Jericho,  .  .  .136 
Arresting  course  of  sun  and  moon,  136 
Urim  and  Thummim,  &c.,  .     137 

Inquiring  of  God,       .         .         .138 

Micaiah, 138 

Sacrifice  of  Saul's  grandchildren,     139 
Fruits  to  Israelites  of  their  access 
to  God, 139 


106 
107 
111 
112 
113 
114 
119 
122 
124 
125 
125 
127 

128 
128 
129 
132 
134 


of 


Page 

89 
90 
90 
93 
94 

94 

97 
98 
98 

98 

101 
102 

102 
103 
103 


Dreams,      . 

Visions, 

Ministrations  of  angels, 

Satan, 

Apparitions  of  God,   . 

Water  changed  into  wine. 

Feeding  multitudes,  . 

Star  guiding  wise  men. 

Temptation  of  Jesus, 

Cursing  the  fig-tree,  . 

Speaking  in  foreign  tongues 

Curing  sicknesses. 

Use  of  spittle,  &c.,     . 

Deaf  and  dumb  spirit, 

Devils  in  swine, 

Raising  the  dead. 

The  appeal  to  miracles. 

Those    without    evidence 
miracles. 

Inequality  of  the  testimony. 

Publication  of  the  testimony. 

Reasons   for    suppressing    testi 
mony,      .... 

Reception  of  the  testimony. 

Withholding  testimony,     , 

Power  towork  miracles  to  accom- 
pany acceptance  of  faith, 

The  signs  of  miracles  now  wanting,  161 


140 
141 
142 
143 
144 
145 
145 
146 
146 
147 
148 
148 
149 
149 
150 
150 
151 

153 
153 
154 

155 
157 
157 

159 


CONTENTS. 


V. — PROPHECY. 


IZ 


'^;* 


W 


M 


1 


The  appeal  to  prophecy. 
False  prophets. 
Test  of  true  prophets. 
Indistinctness  of  prophecies. 
The  prophetic  style,  . 
The  prophets  as  a  body,     . 
Prophets  excited  by  music, 
Extatic  excitement  of  prophets, 
Prophesying  through  dreams  or 

visions,    .... 
Extravagant  action  of  prophets. 
The  stated  prophets, 
Prophecies  recorded  after  events, 
Eras  of  the  prophets. 
Authenticity  of  Isaiah  and  Daniel 

questioned, 
Isaiah  composite, 


Page 
162 
163 
163 
164 
165 
165 
166 
167 

167 
168 
170 
170 
170 

172 
172 


Page 
Isaiah  brought  to  period  of  cap- 

ti\4ty, 173 

Transition  from  times  of  Assyria 

to  times  of  Babylon,  .  .  173 
Detached  prophecies,  .         .173 

Times  of  Assyria  and  of  Babylon,    173 

Idumea, 174 

The  final  section  given  in  three 

parts,  ....     174 

Daniel  not  in  Hebrew  canon,      .     175 

associated  with  Apocrypha,      1 75 

brought  to  Grecian  times,       175 

unreal  in  statements,  .     176 

Historic  errors,  .  .  .  .177 
Apocalypse  founded  on  books  of 

Enoch  and  Daniel,  .         .178 

Prophecy  on  Babylon  taken  from 

Isaiah  and  Jeremiah,      .        .179 


VI. — THE  PROPHECIES  DISCUSSED. 


The  bondage  in  Egypt, 
The  Jews  to  form  a  great  nation. 
Grant  of  promised  land. 
Boundaries  of  the  land, 
Possession  of  the  land. 
Operations  outside  the  limits. 
Non-possession  within  the  limits. 
Inability  to  eject  Canaanites, 
Non-possession  by  Abraham, 
Perpetuity  of  inheritance,  . 
Statutes  to  endure  for  ever. 
Perpetuity  of  throne  of  David, 
The  70  years'  captivity, 
The  70  weeks  of  Daniel,     . 
Dispersion  and  restoration  of  the 

Jews,      .... 
A  destruction  of  Jerusalem 

mitted,   .... 
Captivity  of  the  ten  tribes, 
The  end  of  Jeroboam, . 
The  fate  of  Josiah  and  Jehoiakim 
Judgment  of  foreign  nations, 
Egypt, 
Edom, 
Moab, 

Pl?.giarisms  of  Jeremiah, 
Damascus,  . 
Tyre,   .... 


re 


182 
183 
184 
184 
187 
187 
188 
190 
191 
191 
192 
193 
194 
196 

196 

201 
201 
202 
202 
203 
203 
205 
206 
207 
209 
209 


Tyre  to  be  desolate  70  years,  .  210 
Siege  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  .        .210 

Assyria, 213 

to  be  judged  at  restora- 
tion of  Israel,  .         .         .213 

Babylon, 214 

Arabian  not  to  pitch  tent  there,  217 
None  to  pass  thereby,  .  .218 
No  stone  thereof  to  be  used,  .  218 
Destruction  to  be  sudden,  .        .     219 

to  be  by  fire,       .         .         .220 

Rome,  Pagan  and  Popish,  ,  .221 
The  visions  of  four  kingdoms  in 

Daniel, 222 

Rome  not  the  subject  of  prophecy,  224 
The  Messianic  prophecies,  .  .  227 
Messiah  announced  by  Moses,  .  227 
Bruising  seed  of  serpent,  .  .  229 
A  prophet  like  unto  Moses,  .  230 
The  seed  of  Abraham,  .  .  232 
The  throne  of  David,  .         .     234 

Descent  from  David,  .         .237 

Divinity  of  the  Messiah,  .  ,  239 
The  70  weeks  of  Daniel,  .  .  242 
The    commandment    to    restore 

Jerusalem,  ....  243 
The  sceptre  departing  from  Judah,  247 
Birth  from  a  virgin,    .        .        .     248 


CONTENTS. 


Page 
Peace  on  earth,  ....  250 
Called  out  of  Egypt,  .  .  .250 
Rachel  weeping  for  her  children,  251 
To  be  called  a  Nazarene,  .  .  252 
Elijah  the  forerunner,  .  .  252 
The  voice  crying  in  the  wilderness,  254 


The  land  of  Zabulon,  &c., 
The  acceptable  year, 
Speaking  in  parables, 
Taking  on  him  our  infirmities,   . 
Who  hath  believed  our  report  ? 
The  zeal  of  thine  house,  &c., 
Riding  on  an  ass, 
Out  of  the  mouth  of  babes,  &c., 
Treachery  of  Judas,    . 
Wages  of  Judas, 
Deposition  of  Judas,    .        . 
The  man  of  sorrows,    . 


254 
256 
257 

258 
258 
259 
260 
261 
262 
263 
264 
265 


Predictions  by  Jesus  of  his  death,   267 
The  brazen  serpent,    . 
The  rejected  corner  stone,  . 
The  smitten  shepherd, 
My  God,  my  God,  why  hast  thou 
forsaken  me  ?  ... 


268 
268 
270 

271 


They  pierced  my  hands  and  my 
feet,         ..... 

Parting  his  garments, 

I  thirst,      ..... 

A  bone  of  him  not  to  be  broken. 

The  sacrifice  of  Jesus, 

The  sacrificial  types. 

They   shall    look  on   him  they 
pierced,    .... 

Numbered  with  transgressors,    . 

The  resurrection, 

The  ascension, 

The  call  of  the  Gentiles,     . 

The  second  advent,     . 

Nearness  of  advent,    . 

Application  of  nearness  of  advent 
to  doctrinal  teaching. 

Testimony  of  Apocalypse,  . 

Precise  period  unrevealed. 

The  suffering  and  the  triumphant 
Messiah,  .... 

Instruction  by  miracles  and  pro- 
phecy,      


Page 

273 
274 
275 

277 
277 
278 

279 
279 
280 

282 
282 
283 
284 

285 

287 
287 

288 

289 


VII. — HISTORY   OF   JESUS. 


Narrative,  ....    290 

Birth  of  John,  .  .  .  .291 
Coming  of  Elias,  .        .         .     292 

Mission  of  John,  .  .  .  293 
Birth  of  Jesus,  ....  295 
The  throne  of  David,  .         .     297 

The  genealogies,  .        .         .    297 

Derivation  of  Jesus,  .  .  .  301 
Blemishes  in  lineage,  .  .  .  303 
Estimate  by  Jesus  of  his  mother,  303 
Narrative  resumed,  .  .  .  304 
Birth  at  Bethlehem,  .  .  .  305 
The  taxation,  ....  308 
Witnesses  unhistorical,  .  .  309 
Slaughter  of  infants,  .  .  .  309 
Period  of  birth  of  Jesus,  .  .312 
Adolescence  of  Jesus,  .  .  .312 
Relations  with  John,  .  .  .313 
The  temptation,  .  .  .  .315 
The  apostles,  .  .  .  .315 
Call  of  Matthew,  .  .  .318 
Call  of  Peter  and  Andrew,  and 
James  and  John,      .        .         .     318 


The  seventy,        .        .        .         • 
The  end  of  Judas, 
Fate  of  the  other  apostles, 
Character  of  the  dispensation,     . 
Purification  of  the  temple, 
Duration  of  ministry, 
Recapitulation    of   discrepancies 

in  early  history. 
Field  of  ministry, 
Final  journey  to  Jerusalem 
Ensuing  events. 
The  anointing,     . 
Association     with     family 

Lazarus,  . 
The  last  supper, 
The  betrayal  by  Judas, 
Jesus  avoiding  publicity. 
The  judgment. 
The  crucifixion, 
Historical  supports,    . 
Phenomena  at  death  of  Jesus, 
The  resurrection, 
Last  instructions  of  Jesus, 


of 


320 
320 
321 
321 
324 
325 

326 
326 
329 
329 
332 

334 
335 
337 
341 
343 
347 
351 
352 
353 
361 


i^ 


CONTENTS. 


Actualities  of  death  and  resurrec- 
tion,        .         .         .         .         • 
Recapitulation  of   discrepancies 

as  to  the  resurrection,     . 
Reception  of   evidence  to  resur- 
rection by  the  disciples, 
Jesus  rising  in  his  natural  body, 
Appearance  of  Jesus  to  Paul, 
Testimony  of  the  apostles, 


Page 

364 

365 

368 
370 
371 
373 


Witnesses  to  the  resurrection. 
The  early  heresies. 
Foundation  of  the  history. 
Existence   of    the  heresies  dis- 
closed in  the  scripture, 
The  opening  for  fictitious  repre- 
sentations,      .... 
How  reception  of  the  history  is 
secured,  ..... 


XI 

Page 
373 
374 
377 

378 

380 

381 


•J* 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 


I. 

CONVERSATION  BETWEEN  A  REFORMED  PUNDIT  AND 

A  CANDID  STUDENT. 

PUNDIT. — The  Bible  has  been  put  into  my  hands  as  being 
the  ''  Word  of  God."  I  find  great  difficulty  in  judging  of  the 
character  of  this  book,  and  hearing  that  you  have  made  it 
your  study,  I  come  to  you  in  the  hope  that  you  will  assist  me 
in  understanding  how  I  am  to  look  upon  it.  I  am  shaken 
out  of  my  own  persuasion,  as  a  Hindu,  and  am  told  by  Chris- 
tians, with  whom  I  have  now  come  into  contact,  that  their 
book  is  the  only  one  to  trust  to.  They  say,  in  fact,  that  my 
fate  in  the  future  state  depends  upon  my  accepting,  or  reject- 
ing?, the  statements  made  in  this  book.  Will  you,  therefore, 
enable  me  to  judge  of  its  history  and  authority? 

Student.— Gladly  :  I  will  answer  to  the  best  of  my  power 
any  questions  you  may  put  to  me  on  the  subject. 

P._In  what  sense   is   this  book  to  be  considered  "The  ^fP^^^^^^ 
Word  of  God  ?"     God,  I  presume,  did  not  actually  write  it  ?^ 

S. No;  that   is  not  alleged.     It   was  written  by  man's 

hand. 

p. Was  this  effected   by  some  one  chosen  person,  whose 

thoughts  and  hand  were  guided  by  God  to  compose  the  book  ? 

^. No.      The  statement  is,  that  various  people,  at  different 

times,  spreading  over  a  long  course  of  years,  were  used  for  the 
purpose  ;  as  it  is  written,  *'God,  who  at  sundry  times,  and  in 
divers  manners,  spake  in  time  past  unto  the  fathers  by  the 

prophets"  (Heb.  i.  1). 

p. In  what  way  was  this  instrumentality  made  use  of  ? 

^_It  is  said  by  acts  of   inspiration.      "  AU  scripture  is 
given  by  inspiration  of  God"   (2  Tim.  iii.  16).      '^  Holy  men 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 


Language 
of  Book. 


of  God  spake  as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost"  (2  Pet. 
i.  21). 

P. — What  warrant  is  there  that  what  these  different  per- 
sons wrote  was  in  very  truth  put  into  their  heads  by  God '{ 

S. — This  being  a  matter  between  themselves  and  God,  there 
can  be  no  independent  testimony  of  the  act  of  inspiration. 
The  writers  say  they  were  so  inspired,  and  demand  confidence 
on  the  ground  of  being  holy  men. 

P. — As  the  holiness  of  the  writers  appears  to  be  one  of  the 
ingredients  to  the  reception  of  what  they  may  have  said, 
what  assurance  is  there  that  they  were  thus  holy? 

S. — Of  that  we  cannot  be  said  to  have  any.  We  have  no 
account  of  the  lives  of  any  excepting  David,  the  psalmist,  and  he 
was  steeped  in  crime.  Some  of  their  thoughts,  in  fact,  are  on 
subjects  so  impure,  that  people  avoid  these  passages,  and  wish 
them  expunged;  and  one  writer,  Hosea  (i.  1-6;  iii.  1),  carried 
out  in  action,  alleging  he  did  so  by  the  direct  command  of  God, 
offences  against  morality,  of  which  elsewhere  it  is  said  that  those 
thus  guilty  "  God  will  judge"  (Heb.  xiii.  4). 

P. — Then  I  am  to  read  this  book  with  discrimination,  and 
judge  what  in  it  is  of  man,  and  not  of  God. 

S. — One  would  think  so  ;  but  you  are  seriously  warned 
against  interfering  with  it  in  any  way.  "Ye  shall  not  add 
unto  the  word  which  I  command  you  ;  neither  shall  ye  diminish 
ought  from  it"  (Deut.  iv.  2).  "  If  any  man  shall  take  away 
from  the  words  of  the  book  of  this  prophecy,  God  shall  take 
away  his  part  out  of  the  book  of  life"  (Rev.  xxii.  19). 

P. — Certainly ;  it  stands  to  reason,  that,  if  God  has  con- 
sidered it  necessary  to  man's  welfare  in  a  future  state  to  make 
verbal  communications  to  him,  any  interference  with  his  word 
must  bring,  not  the  individual  only,  but  the  whole  race,  into 
peril.  Precautions,  worthy  of  the  infallible  author,  must,  of 
course,  have  been  taken  to  preserve  his  word  intact.  In 
what  language  were  the  inspirations  communicated  ? 

S. — In  Hebrew,  as  regards  the  Old  Testament ;  and  in 
Greek,  as  regards  the  New. 

P. — Are  these  living  languages,  and  generally  understood  1 

S. — No.  They  are  dead,  and  known  only  to  the  learned. 
Hebrew,  for  example,  has  been  out  of  use  since  the  time  of 
Nehemiah,  or  for  more   than  two  thousand  three  hundred 


years  ;  as,  when  the  Scripture  was  read  out  to  the  people  in 
his  day,  they  had  to  "  give  the  sense,  and  cause  them  to  un- 
derstand the  reading "  (Neh.  viii.  8) ;  that  is,  they  had  to 
interpret  it  into  the  current  dialect,  which  was  Chaldee.  We 
also  everywhere  depend  upon  translations. 

P. — Have  the  translators  been  inspired  ? 

S. — No.  No  one  pretends  that  this  has  been  the  case. 
They  have  simply  done  their  work  to  the  best  of  their  ability 
as  mere  men. 

P. — Can  you  give  me  a  sample  of  the  written  Hebrew  ?  I 
should  be  glad  to  have  it  in  English  characters. 

S. — I  can.  Here  are  the  first  seven  verses  of  Genesis  as 
they  originally  stood  : — 

BRASHYTHBRAALIIYMATHHSHm'MVATHHARTSVHARTSinTHHTHirV^BHVVCHSHKGN 
LPNYTHHVMVRVCHALHYMMRCHPHTHGNLPNYHMYM\^'AMRALHYMYHYAVRVYHyAV 
RVYRAALHYMATHHAVRKYTVBVYBRLALHYMBYNHAVRVBYNHCHSHKVYKRAALHYML 
AVRYVMVLCHSHKKRALYLHVYHYNGRBVYHYBKRYVMACHDVYAMRALHYMYHYRKYGN 
BTHRKHMYMVYHYMBDYLBYNMYMLMYMVYGNSHALHYMATHHRKYGNVYBDLBYNHMY 
MASHRMTCHTHLRKYGNVBYNHMYMASHRMGNLLRKYGNVYUYKN. 

P. — How  is  it  possible  to  make  anything  of  this  array  of 
letters  undivided  into  words,  or  to  pronounce  so  many  conson- 
ants without  intervening  vowels  ? 

S. — The  learned  have  done  that  for  us.  While  Hebrew  was 
a  living  language,  the  above  form  of  writing  was  intelligible  to 
those  who  used  it,  but  when  it  fell  out  of  use,  it  became  neces- 
sary to  supply  help  by  dividing  the  words  and  introducing 
the  vowels. 

P. — How  long  after  the  language  had  become  dead  was  this 

done  ? 

S. — It  is  doubtful  when  the  division  into  words  was  effected. 
Points,  to  represent  the  vowels,  were  put  in  about  fifteen 
hundred  years  after  the  language  fell  out  of  use.^ 

P. — That  is  a  long  interval  between  the  time  when  there 
was  a  familiar  knowledge,  of  the  language,  and  the  attempt  to 
make  its  records  intelligible.  The  insertion  of  vowel  points 
opens  out  great  risk  of  error.  For  instance,  in  English,  m  d 
midit  be  turned  into  "mad,"  "made,"  "mud,"  "mid," 
"  maid,"  and  so  forth.  Are  the  learned,  on  whom,  of  course, 
the  unlearned  have  to  depend,  themselves  satisfied  with  the 
work  as  performed  ? 

1  Smith's  Diet,  of  the  Bible,  Art.  Old  Test. 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 


Custody  of 
Book. 


The  ark. 


S, — No.  Sir  Wm.  Drummond,  for  example,  says,  "  I  have 
wholly  discarded  the  Masoretic  points.  I  believe  there  are 
few  Hebraists  will  think  of  undertaking  to  defend  the 
Masorah."^  The  Masorah  is  a  book  of  Jewish  traditions,  to 
the  writers  of  which  these  points  are  attributed. 

p. — Is  the  translation  from  the  Hebrew  to  be  depended  on  ? 

S. — No.  Sir  Wm.  Drummond  says,  "  I  have  seldom  seen 
two  Hebraists,  who  read,  and  who  translated,  two  chapters 
alike  throughout  the  whole  Scriptures."^ 

P. — The  Old  Testament  purports  to  be  a  very  ancient  record. 
To  whom  was  the  custody  thereof  assigned  ? 

S. — To  the  Jews.  "  Unto  them  were  committed  the  oracles 
of  God  "  (Rom.  iii.  2). 

P. — In  what  way  were  they  to  preserve  them  ? 

S. — They  were  to  deposit  them  in  the  ark.  "Take  this 
book  of  the  law,  and  put  it  in  the  side  {i.e.,  inside)  of  the  ark 
of  the  covenant  of  the  Lord  your  God,  that  it  may  be  there 
for  a  witness  against  thee"  (Deut.  xxxi.  26).  The  ark  was 
the  most  sacred  object  which  the  Jews  possessed,  and  it  was 
kept  in  the  most  holy  place  in  their  tabernacle,  or  temple,  to 
which  the  high  priest  alone  had  access. 

P. — Was  this  order  attended  to  ? 

S. — No.  In  the  time  of  Solomon,  "  There  was  nothing  in 
the  ark  save  the  two  tables  of  stone  which  Moses  put  there  at 
Horeb"  (1  Kings  viii.  9).  These  tables  contained  command- 
ments said  to  have  been  written  with  the  finger  of  God. 

P. — What  has  become  of  these  tables  of  stone,  and  of  the 

ark  ? 

,S^. — No  one  knows.  They  are  not  spoken  of  again  after  the 
time  of  Solomon,  that  is  more  than  two  thousand  eight 
hundred  years  ago. 

P. — Was  there  not  something  mysterious  about  the  ark  ? 
Had  it  not  some  innate  power  attaching  to  it  such  as  is  alleged 
as  respects  objects  of  Fetich  worship  ? 

S. — So  it  is  said.  It  is  described  as  the  appointed  place 
where  God  would  hold  communication  with  Moses.  "  There  I 
will  meet  with  thee,  and  I  will  commune  with  thee  from 
above  the  mercy  seat,  from  between  the  two  cherubims  which 
are  upon  the  ark  of  the  testimony,  of  all  things  which  I  will 


t 


*  CEdipus  Judaicus,  xvii.,  xviii. 


2  Idem,  80. 


give  thee  in  commandment  unto  the  children  of  Israel  (Ex. 
XXV.  22.)      Moses  goes,  on  an  occasion,  for  the  purpose  of  this 
communing.      "  Then  he  heard  the  voice  of  one  speaking  unto 
him  from  off  the  mercy-seat  that  was  upon  the  ark  of  testi- 
mony   from    between    the    two    cherubims"    (Num.   vii.    89.) 
Aaron  was  warned  not  to  come   "  at  all  times  into  the  holy 
place  within  the  veil  before  the  mercy-seat,  which  is  upon  the 
ark  ;  that  he  die  not ;  for  I  will  appear,"  (God  is  said  to  have 
declared),  *'  in  the  cloud  upon  the  mercy-seat "   (Lev.  xvi.  2). 
The  ark  was   at  one  time  captured   by  the  Philistines,  and 
carried   into  the  house  of  their  god  Dagon.      In  the  morning 
it  was  found  that    ''Dagon  was  fallen  upon  his  face  to  the 
ground  before  the  ark  of  the  Lord  ;  and  the  head  of  Dagon 
and  both  the  palms  of  his  hands  were  cut  off  upon  the  thres- 
hold;   only  the  stump  of  Dagon   was  left  to  him"    (1    Sam. 
V.  4).      On  another  occasion,  God  is  said  to  have  *'  smote  the 
men  of  Beth-shemesh,  because  they  had  looked   into  the  ark 
of  the  Lord,  even  he  smote  of  the  people  fifty  thousand  and 
three  score  and  ten  men"  (1  Sam.  vi.  19).      On  another,  when 
the  ark  was  being  conveyed  on  a  cart,  one   "  Uzzah  put  forth 
his  hand  to  the  ark  of  God,  and  took  hold  of  it,  for  the  oxen 
shook    it,   and    the   anger   of   the    Lord   was   kindled   against 
Uzzah  ;  and  God  smote  him  there  for  his  error  ;  and  there  he 
died  by  the  ark  of  God  "  (2  Sam.  vi.  6,  7.) 

P. — If  Aaron  could  not  approach  the  ark  except  on  stated 
occasions,  under  penalty  of  death  ;  and  if  one  man  was 
struck  dead  for  holding  it  up  when  shaken  on  the  cart ;  and  if 
thousands  were  destroyed  for  simply  looking  into  it ;  how  could 
the  Philistines  have  possessed  themselves  of  this  sacred  object 
without  incurring  destruction  1  And  how  could  it  have  finally 
been  made  away  with,  without  a  record  appearing  of  the  note- 
worthy circumstances  that  must  have  attended  the  ultimate 
profanation,  or  destruction,  of  what  appears  to  have  been  God's 
throne  on  earth  ? 

S, — I  am  unable  to  tell  you. 

p. To  revert  to  the   "  Book  of  the  Law,"   which  was   to  Promuiga- 

have  been  preserved  within  the  ark,  besides  the  committing  *^j^^ 
it  to  what  certainly  should  have  been  safe  custody,  were  any 
methods  enjoined  for  promulgating  it  among  the  people  ? 

^S,— Yes.     Each  king,  as  he  succeeded  to  the  throne,  was 


6  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

to  make  a  copy  of  it,  "  and  it  shall  be  with  him,  and  he  shall 
read  therein  all  the  days  of  his  life  "  (Deut.  xvii.  18,  1 9). 
When  the  Israelites  had  passed  into  the  land  conferred  upon 
them,  they  were  to  set  up  large  stones  and  plaster  them  over, 
and  inscribe  "all  the  words  of  this  law"  upon  them.  "  Thou 
shalt  write  upon  the  stones  all  the  words  of  this  law  very 
plainly"  (Deut.  xxvii.  2-8).  And  every  seven  years,  when 
assembled  at  Jerusalem  at  the  feast  of  tabernacles,  the  priests 
were  to  "  read  this  law  before  all  Israel  in  their  hearing " 
(Deut.  xxxi.  10,  11). 

P. — You  astonish  me.  It  must  have  been  an  enormous 
work  to  inscribe  all  the  Book  of  the  Law  upon  plastered  stones. 
Was  this  accomplished  ? 

S. — So  it  is  stated.  Within  the  compass  of  an  altar  con- 
structed by  him,  Joshua  is  said  to  have  written  upon  the 
stones  of  it  "a  copy  of  the  law  of  Moses,  which  he  wrote  in 
the  presence  of  the  children  of  Israel."  Then  he  read  it  out, 
and  "there  was  not  a  word  of  all  that  Moses  commanded 
which  Joshua  read  not  before  all  the  congregation  of  Israel, 
with  the  women,  and  the  little  ones,  and  the  strangers  that 
were  conversant  among  them"  (Josh.  viii.  30-35). 

P. — What  might  have  been  about  the  number  of  the  mul- 
titude ? 

S. — At  the  time  the  Israelites  left  Egypt,  or  forty  years 
before  the  act  in  question  of  Joshua,  the  number  of  the  adult 
males  of  Israel,  without  reckoning  the  Levites,  was  found  to  be 
603,550  (Num.  ii.  32,  33).  This,  it  has  been  computed, 
would  represent  a  population  of  from  two  to  three  millions.^ 

P. — How  could  one  man  have  compassed  so  much  writing, 
and  then  have  made  his  voice  reach  to  so  vast  a  multitude? 

S. — I  am  unable  to  say. 

P. — Are  there  any  remains  of  these  inscribed  stones  ? 

S. — We  never  hear  of  them  again. 

P. — How  could  it  be  expected  that  the  people  should  appre- 
hend, and  bear  in  mind,  such  an  extensive  and  minute  collection 
of  precepts  and  laws  as  are  contained  in  the  books  attributed  to 
Moses,  on  hearing  them  read  out  to  them  but  once  in  seven 
years  ? 

S. — I  cannot  tell  you. 

^  Bishop  Colenso  on  the  Pentateuch,  I.  35. 


i 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT.  7 

P. — Were  the  orders  that  each  king  was  to  take  a  copy 
of  the  law,  and  that  it  was  to  be  read  out  thus  publicly  at  the 
feast  of  tabernacles,  observed  ? 

S. — There  is  evidence  to  the  contrary. 

P, — Perhaps,  as  the  book  of  the  law  was  not  kept  in  its 
appointed  place,  within  the  ark,  I  should  rather  ask  wa^  such 
a  book  ever  forthcoming  ? 

S, — Such  a  book  was  discovered  in  the  reign  of  Josiah,  Di.^overy 
which  was  upwards  of  800  years  after  the  edict  was  given  to 
lay  up  the  book  in  the  ark,  and  about  350  from  the  time  of 
Solomon,  when  it  is  seen  it  was  not  there.  "  And  Hilkiah  the 
highpriest  said  unto  Shaphan  the  scribe,  I  have  found  the  book 
of  the  law  in  the  house  of  the  Lord"  (2  Kings  xxii.  8). 

p — What  certainty  was'  there  that  the  book  so  found  was 
the  original  record  containing  the  inspired  word  of  God  ? 

S. — The  persons  who  are  said  to  have  so  found  it  are  re- 
presented to  have  thought  it  to  be  such.      There  is  no  other 

assurance. 

p. — Can  you  account  for  the  book  being  all  along  in  the 
temple,  and  yet  not  known  of  to  the  priesthood  till  Hilkiah 
brought  it  to  light  ? 

S. — I  am  unable  to  do  so. 

p. Were  there  any  writers  of  that  day,  and  do  they  say 

anything  of  this  discovery  ? 

S. The  prophet  Jeremiah  was  of  that  time.      He  says  a 

good  deal  about  the  priests,  to  their  prejudice,  and  shows  that 
his  mind  was  exercised  on  the  subject  of  the  law.  He  makes 
no  mention  of  the  book,  and  it  is  to  be  gathered  that  it  was 
an  oral,  not  a  written  code,  that  was  current  in  his  day. 
Anticipating  *' devices"  against  himself,  he  says,  "the  law 
shall  not  perish  from  the  priest,  nor  counsel  from  the  wise, 
nor  the  word  from  the  prophet"  (Jer.  xviii.  18). 

p. Putting  aside  the  question  of  the  actual  custody  of  the  ^^^^^^^ 

book,  can  its  existence  be  established  by  the  fact  of  the  ob- 
servation of  its  precepts  during  the  eight  hundred  years  in 
question  that  intervened  between  Moses  and  Josiah  ? 

S, No;   that  cannot  be   satisfactorily  shown.      Ignorance 

is  displayed  of  some  of  the  most  prominent  of  these  laws, 
such  as  cannot  be  reconciled  with  their  currency  in  those 
days. 


l-T 


\i 


8 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 


(I.)  There  is  not  a  trace  of  any  king  having  provided  him- 
self with  a  copy  of  the  law. 

(2.)  Nor  does  it  appear  that  there  was  ever  a  promulgation 
of  the  law  to  the  people.  There  is  not  even  a  note  that  the 
feast  of  tabernacles,  at  which  the  law  was  to  be  promulgated, 
was  kept. 

(3.)  The  Israelites,  when  they  entered  the  land  appointed 
to  them,  were  to  have  no  relations  w^hatever  with  the  people 
they  were  to  dispossess,  but  were  to  exterminate  them. 
"  When  the  Lord  thy  God  shall  deliver  them  before  thee,  thou 
shalt  smite  them,  and  utterly  destroy  them  ;  thou  shalt  make 
no  covenant  with  them,  nor  show  mercy  unto  them"  (Deut. 
vii.  2).  But  no  sooner  did  they  come  into  the  land  than  they 
made  a  covenant  with  Rahab  of  Jericho,  and  all  her  house, 
and  saved  them  alive  (Josh.  ii.  14  ;  vi.  17,  22,  23);  and 
then  with  the  Canaanites  of  Gezer,  whom  "  they  drave  not 
out,"  but  placed  under  tribute  (Josh.  xvi.  10)  ;  also  with  the 
people  of  Bethshean,  and  five  other  Canaanitish  tribes  inhabit- 
ing numerous  "towns"  (Josh.  xvii.  11-13).  David,  in  like 
manner,  spared  the  Moabites,  and  the  Syrians,  and  accepted  gifts 
from  them  (2  Sam.  viii.  2,  6  ;  x.  1 9).  Solomon  also  entered 
into  terms  with  Amorites,  Hittites,  Perizzites,  Hivites,  and 
Jebusites,  and  took  tribute  from  them  (1  Kings  ix.  20,  21)  ; 
and,  in  fact,  he  allied  himself  with  all  the  tribes  "  from  the 
river  (Euphrates)  unto  the  land  of  the  Philistines,  and  unto 
the  border  of  Egypt"  (1  Kings  iv.  21).  Jehosaphat  did  the 
like  with  Philistines  and  Arabians  (2  Chron.  xvii.  11). 

(4.)  "  Neither  shalt  thou  make  marriages  with  them"  (Deut. 
vii.  3).  Salmon  married  Rahab  of  Jericho,  and  their  fourth 
direct  descendant  was  David,  from  whom  came  the  whole 
line  of  the  kings  of  Judah  (Matt.  i.  5,  6).  Naomi's  two  sons 
married  Moabitish  women.  Wlien  these  became  widows,  one 
of  them,  Ruth,  married  Boaz,  and  from  them  king  David  was 
the  third  in  descent  (Ruth  i.  4;  iv.  13,  17).  David  married 
Maacah,  daughter  of  the  king  of  Geshur  (2  Sam.  iii.  3),  and 
also  Bathsheba,  the  widow  of  Uriah  the  Hittite,  and  from 
this  latter  union  came  Solomon  (2  Sam.  xi.  26,  27).  And 
Solomon  no  sooner  came  to  the  throne,  and  while  still  in  full 
acceptance  by  God,  than  he  married  a  daughter  of  the  king 
of  Egypt  (1  Kings  iii.  1). 


'  .( 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 


9 


(5.)  ''  An  Ammonite,"  it  is  said,  "  or  Moabite,  shall  not 
enter  into  the  congregation  of  the  Lord  ;  even  to  their  tenth 
generation  shall  they  not  enter  into  the  congregation  of  the 
Lord  for  ever"  (Deut.  xxiii.  3).  Neither  David,  who  had  in  him 
the  blood  of  Canaanitish  and  Moabitish  ancestry,  nor  his  son 
Solomon,  whose  descent  was  further  tainted  with  the  blood 
of  a  Hittite,  can  be  said  to  have  had  the  requisite  purity 
of  stock ;  and  yet  we  have  the  one  elected  king  as  a  man 
after  God's  heart,  and  the  other  the  chosen  builder  of  the 
temple. 

(6.)  "  The  man  that  committeth  adultery  with  another 
man's  wife,  even  he  that  committeth  adultery  with  his  neigh- 
bour's wife,  the  adulterer  and  the  adulteress  shall  surely  be 
be  put  to  death"  (Lev.  xx.  10).  David  committed  adultery 
with  Uriah's  wife  (2  Sam.  xi.  4),  and  while  both  he  and  she 
should  have  suffered  death,  they  were  allowed  to  marry  and 
become  the  parents  of  a  whole  line  of  kings. 

(7.)  "  He  that  killeth  any  man  shall  surely  be  put  to 
death  "  (Lev.  xxiv.  J  7).  '*  Ye  shall  take  no  satisfaction  for 
the  life  of  a  murderer,  which  is  guilty  of  death  ;  but  he  shall 
be  surely  put  to  death  "  (Num.  xxxv.  31).  "  He  shall  be  de- 
livered into  the  hand  of  the  avenger  of  blood,  that  he  may 
die.  Thine  eye  shall  not  pity  him,  but  thou  shalt  put  away 
the  guilt  of  innocent  blood  from  Israel,  that  it  may  go  well 
with  thee"  (Deut.  xix.  11-13).  If  ever  there  was  "innocent 
blood  "  shed,  it  was  that  of  Uriah,  and  the  guilt  of  his  murder 
was  deepened  by  its  motive,  the  adultery  with  his  wife. 
Nathan  was  God's  appointed  instrument  to  4^^^  with  David 
for  his  crime.  "  Thou  hast  killed  Uriah  the  Hittite  with 
the  sword,"  was  Nathan's  judgment  on  him,  *'  and  hast 
taken  his  wife  to  be  thy  wife."  And  for  this  double  guilt 
God  is  represented  to  have  '*  taken  satisfa,ction  "  by  destroy- 
ing the  innocent  offspring  of  the  adulterous  intercourse  (2 
Sam    xii.  1,  9,  14). 

(8.)  It  was  enjoined  on  the  king  that  he  should  not 
"  multiply  wives  unto  himself,  that  his  heart  turn  not  away" 
(Deut.  xvii.  17).  David  evidently  knew  of  no  such  divine 
restriction.  His  first  wife,  Michal,  Saul's  daughter,  being 
taken  from  him,  he  compensated  himself  with  two  others, 
Abigail  and   Ahinoam  (1  Sam.  xxv.  42-44).      When  king  in 


1 


10 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 


11 


Ih 


<i 


Hebron,  we  find  him  with  four  more  ;  namely,  Maacah, 
Haggith,  Abital,  and  Eglah  (2  Sam.  iii.  3-5).  As  soon  as  he 
had^'^established  himself  in  Jerusalem,  he  ''took  him  more 
concubines  and  wives  out  of  Jerusalem"  (2  Sam.  v.  13). 
How  many  we  are  not  told.  The  concubines  were  so  nume- 
rous, that,  when  he  fled  from  Absalom,  he  could  leave  ten  "  to 
keep  the  house "  (2  Sam.  xv.  16).  It  appears,  moreover, 
that  he  had  appropriated  all  Saul's  relicts,  who,  according  to 
the  prophet  Nathan,  had  been  given  over  "  into  his  bosom  " 
by  God  (2  Sam.  xii.  8),  the  Deity  violating  his  own  order. 
What  number  of  females  were  thus  added  to  the  royal  seraglio 
we  are  not  informed.  Still  not  satisfied,  this  model  king, 
through  the  murder  of  Uriah,  possessed  himself  of  Bathsheba 
in  addition  (2  Sam.  xi.  27). 

(9.)   The  priestly  ofiice  was  not  general  to  the  Levites,  but 
was  confined  to  the  family  of  Aaron  (Ex.    xxviii.  1)  ;  and  to 
invade  it  was  death  (Num.  iii.  1  0).      Accordingly,  when  Korah, 
who  was  a  mere   Levite,  and  Dathan  and  Abiram,  who  were 
Reubenites,   aspired  to  the   priesthood,   the  earth  opened   in 
judgment  upon  them,  and   swallowed  them  up,  with   all  who 
belonged  to  them   (Num   xvi.    1-40).      Gideon,  who  was   an 
Abiezrite — that  is,  of  the  tribe  of  Manasseh — made  an  offer- 
ing to  an  angel,  which  was  accepted,  fire  coming  miraculously 
at  the  angel's  touch  out  of  the  rock  on  which  the  offering  had 
been   laid,   and  consuming   it.      And   after   this,  he  built   an 
altar,  and  was   ordered  by  God  to  sacrifice  upon  it  (Jud.  vi. 
11-27).      Manoah  was   of  the  tribe  of  Dan.     He  was  visited 
by  an  angel,  before  whom  he  "  took  a  kid,  with  a  meat-offer- 
ing, and  offered    it   upon  a  rock  unto  the   Lord."      And    the 
priestly  offices  of  this   Danite  were   accepted  :   "  For  it  came 
to  pass,  when  the  flame  went  up  toward  heaven  from  off  the 
altar,  that  the  angel  of  the  Lord  ascended  in  the  flame  of  the 
altar"  (Jud.  xiii.  2,  20).      Micah,  an  Ephraimite,  consecrates 
one  of  his   own  sons,  who   thus  "became  his   priest."      Then 
he  meets  with  a  man  "  of  the  family  of  Judah,"  who,  never- 
theless, is  considered  to  be  "a  Levite."     Micah  "  consecrates  " 
him,   and  hires  him  to    be  his  domestic  priest,    the  worship, 
however,  being  idolatrous  ;  and  then  he  says,  in  his  simplicity, 
"  Now  know  I  that  the  Lord  will  do  me  good,  seeing  I  have  a 
Levite  to  my  priest "  (Jud.  xvii.  1-13).    After  this,  the  children 


V 


f 


of  Dan  set  up  one  Jonathan  to  be  their  priest  ;  and  he  is  de- 
scribed as   the   son   of  Gershom,  the  son  of  Manasseh.      He 
should  properly  have  been   an   Aaronite.      Of  what  tribe   he 
really  was,  is  not  clear.      As  the  son  of  Gershom,  he  would  be 
a  Levite ;    but  again,  with  strange  confusion,  he  is  derived 
from  Manasseh.      Of  this  family,  nevertheless,  it  is  said  that 
they  "  were  priests  to  the  tribe  of  Dan  until  the  day  of  the 
captivity  of  the  land"  (Jud.  xviii    80).      Samuel  wa^  of  the 
tribe  of  Ephraim  (l  Sam.  i.  1),  and  yet  exercised  the  priestly 
office   acceptably.      "  And  Samuel  took  a  sucking   lamb,  and 
offered    it  for  a   burnt-offering  wholly  unto   the   Lord  ;    and 
Samuel  cried   unto  the  Lord  for  Israel,  and  the   Lord   heard 
him "  (1  Sam.  vii.  9).      On  the  occasion  of  bringing  up  the 
ark,   which   had   been   captured  by   the   Philistines,  the  Le- 
vites  (it  is  not  said  the  Aaronites,)   ''  offered  seven  bullocks 
and  'seven  rams"  (1  Chron.  xv.  26).      And  David,  who  was 
of  Judah,  headed  the  procession,  "  clothed  with  a  robe  of  fine 
linen"   and   having   on    "an  ephod  of  linen,"  which   was   a 
priestly   garb    (Lev.    vi.  10  ;    Ex.    xxviii.    6),    and  officiated. 
"  And  when  David   had  made  an  end  of  offering  the  burnt- 
offerings  and  the   peace-offerings,  he  blessed  the  people  in  the 
name  of  the   Lord"  (1  Chron.  xv.  27  ;  xvi.   1,  2).      On  an- 
other occasion,  there  was  a  divine  recognition  of  his  act,  God 
having  "  answered  him  from  heaven  by  fire  upon  the  altar  of 
burnt-offering  (1  Chron.  xxi.  26).      Solomon,  his  son,  officiated 
in  the   same  manner.     "  And   the  king,  and   all  Israel  with 
him,  offered  sacrifice  before  the  Lord.      And   Solomon  offered 
a  sacrifice  of  peace-offerings,  which  he  offered  unto  the  Lord, 
two  and  twenty  thousand  sheep  "  (1  Kings  viii.  62,  63).     And 
this   met  with  divine   acceptance,  for  "  fire   came  down  from 
heaven,  and  consumed   the   burnt-offering   and  the  sacrifice  ; 
and  the  glory  of  the  Lord  fiUed  the  house  "  (2  Chron.  vii.  1). 
Elijah  the  Tishbite,  who  was  of  Gilead,  that  is,  of  the  tribe  of 
Manasseh  (1    Kings  xvii.  1  ;  Num.  xxvi.  29),  placed    himself 
in  competition  with  the  priests  of  Baal,  and  erected  an  altar, 
on  which  he  offered  up  a  bullock,  and  fire  from  heaven  came 
down  and  burnt  up  the  sacrifice,  in  token  that  God  had   ac- 
cepted it  (1  Kings  xviii.  19-38). 

(10.)   Of  the  Levites,  that  division  who  were  Kohathites  had 
charge  of  the  ark.     The  Aaronites  were  first  to  cover  up  the 


12 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 


13 


ark  and  the  other  holy  furniture,  and  the  Kohathites  were  to 
carry  the  same  during  the  pilgrimage  in  the  desert  (Num. 
111.  31  ;  iv.  4-15.)  They  were  not  even  to  set  eyes  on  these 
sacred  objects,  when  uncovered,  under  penalty  of  death  (Num. 
iv.  20).  The  Philistines  captured  the  ark,  but  finding  it  a 
troublesome  possession,  they  gave  it  up.  Then  ''  the  men  of 
Kirjath-jearim,"  (not  Kohathites,  be  it  observed,)  *'  came  and 
fetched  up  the  ark  of  the  Lord,  and  brought  it  into  the  house 
of  Abinadab  in  the  hill,  and  sanctified  Eleazar,  his  son,  to 
keep  the  ark  of  the  Lord ;  and  it  came  to  pass,  while  the  ark 
abode  in  Kirjath-jearim,  that  the  time  was  long,  for  it  was 
twenty  years"  (1  Sam.  vii.  1,  2).  At  the  end  of  this  time 
David  came  with  his  people,  "  and  they  set  the  ark  of  God 
upon  a  new  cart,"  drawn  by  "  oxen,"  and  so  took  it  to  the 
house  of  Obed-edom  the  Gittite.  "  And  the  ark  of  the  Lord 
continued  in  the  house  of  Obed-edom  the  Gittite  three  months; 
and  the  Lord  blessed  Obed-edom  and  all  his  household"  (2 
Sam.  vi.  1-11).  From  thence  David  took  it  to  Jerusalem  (v. 
12-16),  and  in  the  parallel  account  in  Chronicles  it  is  said 
that  Levites,  (not,  however,  Kohathites,)  were  employed  for  the 
purpose  (1  Chron.  xv.  1,  15).  Throughout,  the  covering  the 
ark  up  from  profane  eyes  by  the  Aaronites,  and  the  peculiar 
office  of  the  Kohathites  in  its  transport,  are  regulations  evi- 
dently unknown  of ;  and  this  sacred  object  is  even  borne  on  a 
cart  as  any  other  commodity  might  be,  and  is  twice  deposited 
in  private  houses.  On  the  last  occasion,  the  abode  of  one 
who  would  seem  to  have  been  of  a  Gentile  tribe  (2  Sam.  xv.  1 9) 
was  made  use  of. 

(11.)  There  was  to  be  none  other  than  the  one  appointed 
altar  for  sacrificial  purposes.  The  edict  was,  "whatsoever 
man  there  be  of  the  house  of  Israel,  or  of  the  strangers  which 
sojourn  among  you,  that  offereth  a  burnt  offering  or  sacrifice, 
and  bringeth  it  not  unto  the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the 
congregation  to  offer  it  unto  the  Lord,  even  that  man  shall  be 
cut  off  from  among  his  people"  (Lev.  xvii.  8,  9).  "Take 
heed  to  thyself  that  thou  offer  not  thy  burnt-offerings  in  every 
place  that  thou  seest ;  but  in  the  place  which  the  Lord  shall 
choose  in  one  of  thy  tribes,  there  thou  shalt  offer  thy  burnt- 
offerings,  and  there  thou  shalt  do  all  that  I  command  thee" 
(Deut.  xii.  13,  14).     This  law  was  understood  in  the  days  of 


I 


V 


Joshua,  as  shown  when  a  certain  section  of  the  tribes  justified 
themselves,  and  described  an  altar  they  had  set  up  to  be  a 
testimonial  one,  and  not  for  sacrifice  (Josh.  xxii.  9-29)  ;  but 
subsequently  it  was  unknown  to,  or  overlooked,  by  even  the 
pious  rulers  of  Judah.  Samuel  judged  Israel  in  rotation,  at 
Bethel,  Gilgal,  and  Mizpeh,  and  there  he  performed  sacrifices. 
He  also  set  up  an  altar  at  his  own  house  in  Ramah  (1  Sam. 
vii.  5-12,  16,  17;  X.  3,  8).  David  built  an  altar  on  the 
threshing  floor  of  Oman,  and  sacrificed  there  with  acceptance. 
Besides  this,  Gibeon  was  in  his  day  the  constituted  place  for 
sacrifice  (1  Chron.  xxi.  26-29).  Absalom  sacrificed  in  Heb- 
ron (2  Sam.  XV.  9,  12),  and  Adonijah  at  Enrogel  (1  Kings 
i.  9).  Elijah  did  so  on  Mount  Carmel  (1  Kings  xviii.  19-38). 
Asa,  Jehosaphat,  Jehoash,  Amaziah,  Uzziah,  and  Jotham,  all 
godly  kings,  tolerated  sacrifices  on  high  places.  Manasseh  did 
so  even  after  his  reformation  (1  Kings  xv.  14;  xxii.  43;  2 
Kings  xii.  3;  xiv.  4;  xv.  4,  35;  2  Chron.  xxxiii.  17). 

(12.)  "Three  times  thou  shalt  keep  a  feast  unto  me  in  the 
year.  Three  times  in  the  year  all  thy  males  shall  appear 
Wore  the  Lord  God"  (Ex  xxiii.  14,  17;  xxxiv.  23)  ;  a  re- 
quisition unknown  to  the  father  of  Samuel,  who  observed  a 
yearly  attendance  only  (1  Sam.  i.  3,  7).  Nor  is  it  shown  that 
others  followed  such  an  ordinance. 

(13.)  Every  seventh  year  was  to  be  a  sabbath,  or  time  of 
rest  for  the  land,  during  which  all  sowing  and  cultivation  was 
to  be  suspended.  Supplies  of  food  were  to  be  assured  by  a 
three-fold  crop,  granted  on  the  sixth  year  (Ex.  xxiii.  10,  11; 
Lev.  XXV.  3,  4,  20,  21).  By  the  application  made  of  the 
prophesied  exile  in  Babylon  for  seventy  years,  each  year  of 
exile  standing  for  a  neglected  sabbatical  year,  there  is  the 
acknowledgment  that  for  a  term  of  four  hundred  and  ninety 
years,  or  from  the  time  of  David,  this  institution  had  been 
overlooked  (Lev.  xxvi.  33-35;  2  Chron.  xxxvi.  21.)  It  may, 
indeed,  be  safely  assumed  that  it  never  was,  or  indeed  could 

be,  observed. 

P. — What  is  stated  to  have  been  the  effect  of  the  discovery  Effects  of 
of  the  "book  of  the  law"  by  Hilkiah  ?  Did  it  come  upon  the  of^k? 
parties  as  a  familiar,  or  as  a  hitherto  unknown  communication  ? 

S, — Evidently  as  what  they  had  hitherto  been  entirely 
ignorant   of.     The  king  is  said  to  have  "  rent  his  clothes," 


14 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 


15 


to  have  publicly  proclaimed  the  law,  to  have  put  down 
idolatries,  slaying  the  priests  who  had  officiated  therein,  and 
then  to  have  celebrated  the  passover,  finding  it  "  written  in 
the  book  of  this  covenant "  that  there  was  such  an  ordinance 
to  be  observed.  "  Surely,"  it  is  declared,  "  there  was  not 
holden  such  a  passover  from  the  days  of  the  judges  that  judged 
Israel,  nor  in  all  the  days  of  the  kings  of  Judah  "  (2  Kings 
xxii.  1]  •  xxiii.  1-24).  The  probability  is  that  the  passover 
had  hitherto  not  been  observed  at  all  throughout  the  period 
in  question,  for  there  is  not  one  instance  of  its  occurrence  save 
in  a  passage  in  2  Chron.  xxx.  2.  It  is  there  said  that  Heze- 
kiah  kept  a  passover,  but  the  statement  is  not  supported  by 
the  contemporaneous  record  in  the  book  of  Kings,  and  as  he 
was  a  godly  king,  he  would  have  kept  it  in  just  as  good  form 
as  Josiah.  Certainly  the  feast  had  been  greatly  over- 
looked, though  the  penalty  for  neglecting  it  was  death  (Num. 

ix.  13). 
Ezras  F- — Did  this  book  of  Hilkiah's  serve  to  keep  up  the  know- 

production   Yq^        £  ^YiQ  law  in  the  times  succeeding  ? 

of  Book.         *^o  /.11111,  1 

;Sf. No.     The  alleged  discovery  of  the  book  led  to  no  such 

solid  results.  A  book  of  the  sort  is  again  produced  by  Ezra, 
150  years  later,  and  then  the  people,  and  even  the  priesthood, 
are  found  to  be  as  ignorant  of  its  provisions  as  if  they  had 
never  been  extant.  The  feast  of  tabernacles  purports  to  have 
been  instituted  to  commemorate  the  deliverance  of  the  Israel- 
ites out  of  Egypt  (Lev.  xxiii.  34-43).  They  suddenly  discover 
that  there  was  such  a  feast  to  be  observed.  "  And  they  found 
written  in  the  law  which  the  Lord  had  commanded  by  Moses 
that  the  children  of  Israel  should  dwell  in  booths  "  (Neh.  viii. 
1,  14).  And  then  they  "found  written  that  the  Ammonite 
and  the  Moabite  should  not  come  into  the  congregation  of 
God  for  ever,"  and  upon  this'  information  they  take  action. 
*'  Now  it  came  to  pass  when  they  had  heard  the  law,  that  they 
separated  from  Israel  all  the  mixed  multitude  "  (Neh.  xiii. 
1-3).  Ezra  himself,  a  few  years  previously,  instituted  the 
like  reform  among  the  body  who  accompanied  him,  on  which 
occasion  the  transgression  was  found  to  embrace  all  the  priest- 
hood as  well  as  the  people  at  large  (Ezra  ix.  and  x). 

p, Is  there  anything  to  show  that  Ezra's  book  was  that 

which  Hilkiah  is  said  to  have  brought  to  light  ? 


^'  f 


S. — There  is  not. 

p. Is  there  anything  to  connect   Ezra's  book  with  any 

existing  version  ? 

S. — Only  tradition  or  supposition. 

p. What  is  the  earliest  extant  version  of  the  Bible  ? 

/S. — The  Septuagint. 

p. — What  is  that  ? 

S. It  is  a  translation  of  the  Old  Testament  into  Greek. 

p. When  was  that  made,  and  under  what  circumstances  ? 

S, About  B.C.  280,  or  upwards  of  150  years  after  the  pub- 
lication by  Ezra.  When  Judea  fell  into  the  hands  of  the 
Ptolemies,  the  Greek  rulers  of  Egypt  in  succession  to  Alexander 
the  Great,  many  Jews  congregated  in  Alexandria,  and  became 
more  conversant  with  the  language  of  their  conquerors  than 
with  their  own,  and  this  Septuagint  translation  was  made  for 

their  use. 

p. Does  it  correspond  with  the  current  English  version  ? 

^. No.    It  differs  greatly  in  its  renderings,  and  it  contains 

fourteen  books  which  the  Protestants  reject  as  apocryphal,  or 
spurious,  but  which  the  Catholics  still  retain  as  inspired. 

p When  were  these  books  rejected  by  the   Protestants, 

and  on  what  authority  ? 

S. About  350  years  ago,  on  the  judgment  of  the  leaders 

of  the  movement. 

p. Might  not  these  leaders  have  gone  further  and  rejected 

others  of  the  books  ? 

S. — Assuredly. 

p. Are  any  others  called  in  question  ? 

^._The  authenticity,  integrity,  or  era,  of  several  are  chal- 
lenged ;  for  example,  of  Esther,  Job,  Isaiah,  Daniel,  Jonah,  and 
Zechariah.  The  Books  of  Chronicles  are,  moreover,  considered 
unreliable  by  most  critics.  There  are  also  detached  passages 
elsewhere,  which  are  viewed  by  critics  as  interpolated. 

p. Are  there  no  Hebrew  versions  of  the  Jewish  scriptures  ? 

S. — There  are. 

p Of  what  period  is  the  most  ancient  of  them  1 

5. No  satisfactory  information  exists  on  this  head.     It  is 

not  thought  that  there  is  any  Hebrew  copy  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment more  than  seven  or  eight   hundred  years   old.       This 

1  Smith's  Diet.,  Art.  Old  Test. 


Earliest 
versions. 


16 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 


17 


stands  at  an  interval  of  fifteen  hundred  years  from  the  publica- 
tion of  the  law  by  Ezra.     The  Targums,  or  Chaldee  paraphrases, 
are  more  ancient.      That  of  Onkelos  on  the  Pentateuch  is  sup- 
posed to  date  from  about  A.D.  200.^ 
Authorship        p — Qa^jj  yQu  say  by  whose  hand  the  Book  of  the  Law,  sup- 

of  Penta-  j  j      j    ^  ^  •    ,        o 

teuch.         posing  the  existmg  version  to  be  a  genume  one,  was  written  f 
>Sf. — The  Pentateuch  is  currently  ascribed  to  Moses;   but 
there  is  much  to  make  it  evident  that  it  must  have  been  put 
together  long  after  his  time. 

P. — Be  pleased  to  make  this  apparent  to  me. 
S. — There  is  the  account  of  the  death  of  Moses  in  the  last 
chapter  of  Deuteronomy,  which  of  course  could  not  have  been 
written  by  himself.  Nor  could  the  edict  to  place  "  this  book" 
in  the  ark  (Deut.  xxxi.  26),  have  been  written  until  after  the 
book  so  indicated  had  been  completed.  If  this  passage  stands 
in  its  proper  place,  some  termination  must  be  given  to  the 
book  at  a  previous  part.  We  are  even  carried  back  as  far  as 
to  Ex.  xxiv.  7  for  the  completion  of  some  such  work,  where  it 
is  said,  that  Moses  "took  the  book  of  the  covenant,  and  read 
in  the  audience  of  the  people  :  and  they  said,  all  that  the 
Lord  hath  said  will  we  do,  and  be  obedient."  All  this  shows 
that  the  work  of  Moses,  if  this  book  could  in  truth  be  thought 
primarily  his,  has  been  supplemented  by  some  other  hand. 
The  writer  repeatedly  refers  to  circumstances  subsisting  "  unto 
his  day"  (Gen.  xix.  37,  38  ;  xxvi.  33  ;  xxxii.  32  ;  Deut.  iii. 
14  ;  xxxiv.  6),  showing  he  wrote  at  a  day  removed  from  the 
events.  He  speaks  of  the  cessation  of  the  manna  provided 
for  the  Israelites  when  in  the  desert,  which  occurred  after  the 
time  of  Moses,  when  they  had  entered  Canaan  (Ex.  xvi.  35). 
He  names  places  such  as  Dan  (Gen.  xiv.  1 4  ;  Deut.  xxxiv.  1), 
Hebron  (Gen.  xiii.  18  ;  xxiii.  2  ;  Num.  xiii.  22),  Gilgal 
(Deut.  xi.  30),  which  only  received  their  names  after  the  con- 
quests in  Canaan  (Jud.  xviii.  29  ;  Josh.  xiv.  15  ;  Josh.  v.  9). 
He  speaks  of  a  time  when  the  Canaanites  and  Perizzites  were 
"then  in  the  land"  (Gen.  xii.  6  ;  xiii.  7),  showing  he  wrote 
after  they  had  been  ejected  from  it ;  and  he  evidences  distinct 
knowledge  of  this  ejectment  (Lev.  xviii.  28).  He  refers  to 
the  occupation  of  the  land  by  the  Israelites  as  an  event  of 
some   standing,   saying,   "  as   it  is  this   day"  (Deut.  iv.  38). 

»  Smith's  Diet.,  Art.  Versions. 


•' 


He  shows  a  knowledge  of  kingly  rule  prevailing  in  Israel 
(Gen  xxvi  31),  their  first  king  not  having  been  set  up  till 
350  years*  after  the  time  of  Moses.  And  where,  under  the 
guise  of  a  prophecy,  he  describes  the  Israelites  as  "  rooted  out 
of  their  land,"  and  "cast  into  another  land  as  it  is  this  day" 
(Deut.  xxix.'28),  he  is  seen  to  stand  in  the  Babylonish  capti- 
vity which  occurred  850  years  after  Moses. 

P.  To  whom,  then,  can  you  attribute  the  authorship? 

^* We  come,  now,  to  the  time  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah.  Ezxajs  pub- 

The  "captivity  lasted  between  fifty  and  sixty  years,  and  Ezra   ^"^  ^^"• 
and  Nehemiah  came  out  of  it.     The  historical  portion  of  the 
Bible  is  brought  do^vn  to  their  day,  and  then  terminates,  and 
it  was  by  them  that  the  book  of  the  law  wa^  produced  and 
published.     The  Babylonish  captivity  acted  forcibly  upon  the 
religious  and  national  sentiments  of  the  Jews.      Psalm  cxxxvii., 
beo-inning  with   "By  the  rivers  of  Babylon,"  is  an  effusion  in- 
dicative "of  such  feeling.      Psalms  xiv.  and  liii.  give  the  cry 
of  the  captives,  "  Oh  that  the  salvation  of  Israel  were  come 
out  of  Zion  !  when  the  Lord  bringeth  back  the  captivity  of  his 
people,  Jacob  shall  rejoice,  and  Israel  shall  be  glad."     Psalm 
Ixix  is  indited  under  the  pressure  of  that  calamity,  with  the 
hope  of  deliverance  and  re-establishment.      "  For  God  will  save 
Zion,  and  will  build  the  cities  of  Judah:  that  they  may  dwell 
there  and  have  it  in  possession."     Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel  hved 
and  wrote  in   those   days.     The  book  of  Esther  is   of  that 
period      Daniel's  book  purports  to  be  of  that  time,  though  its 
acre  is   much   called  in  question.      There   are  several  of  the 
apocryphal  writings  which  profess  to  be  of  that  period,  though 
with  inadmissible  pretensions.      Still,  the  fact  that  some  of  the 
books  of  the  Bible  were  written  at  the  time  m  view,  and  that 
several  productions  of  the  same  stamp  are  attributed  to  that 
period,  marks  it  as  an  age  of  religious  revival  and  literary  acti- 
vity      Ezra,  we  are  told  significantly,   "was  a  ready  scribe 
in  the  law  of  Moses,"  "  a  scribe,"  as  king  Artaxerxes  pubhcly 
addressed  him,  "  of  the  law  of  the  God  of  heaven"  (Ezra  vii. 
6    12)-  and  he  must  have  acquired  his  title  to  such  character 
in   some  way.      The  tradition    current  among   the  Jews  ha^ 
always  been   that  he  put  the  Bible  record  into  its  present 
shape,  and  the  apocryphal  second  book  of  Esdras  embodies  this 
idea      "  Thy  law,"  Esdras  (Ezra)  is  made  to  say,  "is  burnt, 


18 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 


Book  of 
Joshua. 


therefore  no  man  knoweth  the  things  that  are  done  of  thee;" 
and  then  he  asks  power  from  God  to  "  write  all  that  hath 
been  done  in  the  world  since  the  beginning,  which  were 
written  in  thy  law,  that  men  may  find  thy  path;"  and  in 
forty  days,  with  the  aid  of  five  scribes,  he  is  said  to  have 
accomplished  the  task  (2  Esdr.  xiv.  21-44).  The  second 
book  of  Maccabees  (ii.  13),  which,  although  one  of  the  Apoc- 
rypha, is  a  work  of  acknowledged  historical  value,  attributes  a 
like  labour  to  Nehemiah.  ''The  same  things  also  were 
reported  in  the  writings  and  commentaries  of  Neemias :  and  how 
he,  founding  a  library,  gathered  together  the  acts  of  the  kings 
and  the  prophets,  and  of  David,  and  the  epistles  of  the  kings 
concerning  the  holy  gifts."  The  Hilkiah  who  is  said  to  have 
made  the  discovery  of  the  book  of  the  law  in  the  time  of 
Josiah,  was  Ezra's  grandfather  (Ez.  vii.  1),  which  affords  an- 
other link  in  this  chain  of  attributed  authorship.  Nothing 
permanent  came  of  Hilkiah's  discovery,  the  Jews  remaining 
without  any  book  of  the  law  till  the  time  of  Ezra,  just  as  if  no 
such  discovery  had  been  made.  It  is  an  incident  of  a  most 
improbable  kind,  and  without  the  results  attaching  to  a  reality. 
Ezra  may  very  possibly  have  thrown  it  in  as  a  stepping-stone 
to  the  introduction  and  reception  of  his  own  work.  It  is  also 
remarkable,  as  showing  a  family  association  in  connection  with 
this  question  of  authorship,  that  Jeremiah,  who  wrote  at  that 
time,  was  the  son  of  Hilkiah  (Jer.  i.  1). 

P. — Have  the  historical  books,  which  come  after  the  book 
of  the  law,  the  like  marks  it  possesses  of  late  authorship? 

S. — Abundantly  so.  The  book  called  after  the  name  of 
Joshua  cannot  have  been  written  by  him,  as  it  contains  the 
record  of  his  death  (xxiv.  29,  30);  after  which,  it  is  added, 
carrying  us  over  the  book  of  Judges  also,  "  And  Israel  served 
the  Lord  all  the  days  of  Joshua,  and  all  the  days  of  the  elders 
that  overlived  Joshua"  (xxiv.  31).  Nor  could  Joshua,  if 
writing  this  book,  have  said  of  himself,  "  So  the  Lord  was 
with  Joshua;  and  his  fame  was  noised  throughout  all  the 
country"  (vi.  27).  For  the  astounding  miracle  of  the  arrest 
of  time,  the  appeal  is  made  to  another  record,  namely  the 
book  of  Jasher,  a  support  Joshua  certainly  would  not  have 
had  recourse  to  if  he  had  enacted  the  miracle  himself,  as  it  is 
pretended,   and    was    himself    writing    the    account    thereof. 


iiiUjiTii'HnUi  ■r'rrnBiffuwimrnffimm 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 


19 


''  Then  spake  Joshua  to  the  Lord,  and  he  said,  sun  stand  thou 
still  upon  Gibeon ;  and  thou,  moon,  in  the  valley  of  Ajalon. 
And  the  sun  stood  still,  and  the  moon  stayed,  until  the  people 
had  avenged  themselves  upon  their  enemies.  Is  not  this 
written  in  the  book  of  Jasher"  (x.  12,  13).  Now  the  book 
of  Jasher  was  not  written  till  after  the  time  of  David  (2  Sam. 
i.  17,  18).  The  phrase  "unto  this  day"  appears  in  iv.  9; 
vii.  26  ;  viii.  28,  29  ;  ix.  27  ;  x.  27  ;  xiii.  13  ;  and  xvi.  10. 
"As  for  the  Jebusites,  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem,  the 
children  of  Judah  could  not  drive  them  out :  but  the  Jebusites 
dwell  with  the  children  of  Judah  at  Jerusalem  unto  this  day  " 
(xv.  63).  The  siege  and  capture  of  Jerusalem,  here  referred 
to,  was  effected  by  David  (2  Sam.  v.  6,  7)  nearly  four 
hundred  years  after  the  time  of  Joshua. 

The  book  of  Judges  is  avowedly  anonymous.  It  relates  "  to  Book  of 
a  period  of  barbarism,  ignorance,  and  anarchy,  in  which  the 
Israelites,  almost  continually  harassed  by  intestine  commotions, 
oppressed  by  foreign  enemies,  or  employed  in  repelling  their 
aggressions,  had  Httle  leisure  to  attend  to  the  accuracy  of  their 
national  annals."^  It  was,  in  fact,  a  time  unsuitable,  either 
for  literary  composition,  or  the  preservation  of  whatever  writ- 
ings may  already  have  existed.  There  was  "  in  those  days," 
as  we  are  told,  "  no  king  in  Israel,  but  every  man  did  that 
which  was  right  in  his  own  eyes"  (xvii.  6  ;  xxi.  25).  The 
bonds  of  society  must  have  been  too  loosened  to  present  a 
field  for  the  annalist,  and  the  people  were  constantly  suffering 
from  warfare  and  oppression.  In  the  period  of  300  years, 
which  the  book  embraces,  they  had  to  serve  the  Syrians  for 
eight  years  (iii.  8-11),  and  the  Moabites  for  eighteen  (iii.  12- 
30).  Then  the  Philistines  had  to  be  put  down  (iii.  31). 
After  this,  they  served  the  Canaanites  for  twenty  years  (iv.  1-3). 
They  had  then  to  deliver  themselves  from  the  Midianites,  the 
Amalekites,  and  the  people  of  the  east  (ch.  vii.  and  viii). 
Afterwards,  they  were  oppressed  by  the  Phihstines  and  Am- 
monites for  eighteen  years  (x.  7-9).  Ephraim  and  Gilead 
went  to  war  (ch.  xii).  The  Philistines  ruled  the  land  for 
forty  years  (xiii.  l).  Sanguinary  battles  occurred  between 
the  Benjamites  and  the  rest  of  Israel  (ch.  xx).  And  violent 
aggression  was  made  on  Jabesh-Gilead  (ch.  xxi).  Besides 
1  Bigland's  "  Letters  on  History,"  75,  76,  cited  by  Dr  Giles. 


)llgpt»'-»»w!^..  MT^Trap.tfWiilWrirtiWa 


Book  of 
Ruth. 


Books  of 
Samuel. 


Books  of 
Kings. 


Unity  of 
author- 
ship. 


20 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 


this  were  other  foreign  wars,  in  which  the  Israelites  are  said 
to  have  been  the  aggressors,  and  successful.  The  use  of  the 
phrases  *'unto  this  day,"  and  "in  those  days,"  (i.  21,  26; 
xvii.  6  ;  xviii.  1  ;  xix.  1  ;  xx.  27  ;  xxi.  25),  indicates  that 
this  is  not  a  contemporaneous  record,  and  the  writer  shows 
that  he  lived  after  the  establishment  of  the  kingly  rule  (xvii. 
6  ;  xviii.  1  ;  xix.  1  ;  xxi.  25). 

In  Ruth  reference  is  made  to  "  the  days  when  the  judges 
ruled  "  (i.  l),  showing  this  story  to  have  been  drawn  up  after 
the  times  of  the  judges. 

Samuel's  death  is  recorded  in  the  25th  chapter  of  the  1st 

book  bearing  his  name.      He,  consequently,  is  not  to  be  taken 

as  the  author  of  these   books,  and  certainly  could  not  have 

written   of  events  that  occurred   after  his  death,  and  which 

occupy  the  remaining  chapters,  and  the  whole  of  the  second 

book.      "  And  Samuel  judged  Israel  all  the  days  of  his  life  " 

(1  Sam.  vii.  15).     "  The  Lord  sent  Jerubbaal  and  Samuel  and 

delivered  you  out  of  the  hands  of  your  enemies"  (xii.  11). 

"And  all  the  people  greatly  feared  the  Lord  and  Samuel" 

(xii.  18).     These  are  passages  which  show  the  writer  could 

not  have  been  Samuel  himself.     There  are,  in  these  books  also, 

the  phrases  bespeaking  a  bygone  time;  "unto  this  day"  (1 

Sam.  V.  5;  vi.  18  ;  xxvii.  6  ;  xxx.  25;  2   Sam.  iv.  3;  xviii. 

18)  ;  and  "in  those  days"  (2  Sam.  xvi.  23). 

The  books  of  Kings  are  anonymous,  and  are  generally 
allowed  to  have  been  written  after  the  return  of  the  Jews 
from  Babylon.  They  carry  on  the  history  to  "  the  seven  and 
thirtieth  year  of  the  captivity  of  Jehoiachim,"  or  towards 
the  close  of  the  Babylonish  captivity.  They  contain  also 
the  phrase  "unto  this  day,"  common  to  the  previous  books 
(1   Kings  ix.   13;    xii.  19  ;   2  Kings  viii.  22;    xiv.  7;  xvii. 

34). 

p, Are  there  indications  that  these  historical  books  were 

put  together  by  the  same  baud,  notwithstanding  that  they  pur- 
port to  be  by  different  people  ? 

S. — There  are.  The  anachronisms,  and  especially  the  use 
of  the  terms  "  unto  this  day,"  "  in  those  days,"  which  run 
through  them,  betray  a  common  authorship.  The  five  books 
currently  ascribed  to  Moses  were  but  one  in  the  Hebrew  canon. 
The  title  given  thereto  of  the  "  Pentateuch,"  and  the  designa- 


t 


1 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 


21 


tions  of  the  first  and  last  books,  "  Genesis  "  and  Deuteronomy," 
are  of  Greek  origin,  and   the   division   of  the  work  into  five 
books  is  probably  traceable  to  the  Septuagint  version.^     The 
Book  of  Joshua  is  an  evident  continuation  of  the  Pentateuch. 
It  opens — "  Now  after  the  death  of  Moses,  the  servant  of  the 
Lord,  it  came  to  pass,"  &c.   The  Book  of  Judges  is  linked  on  in 
the  same  way,  and  with  the  like  phraseology  :  "  Now  after  the 
death  of  Joshua  it  came  to  pass,"  &c.     The  story  of  Ruth  is 
meant  to  be  an  episode  in  the  Book  of  Judges.     It  opens  thus, 
and  with  the  same  phrase — "  Now  it  came  to  pass  in  the  days 
when  the  Judges  ruled,"  &c.     The  first  Book  of  Samuel  is  in 
form  of  a  continuation  of  the  previous  narratives  :  "  Now  there 
was  a  certain  man  of  Ramathaim-zophim,  of  Mount  Ephraim." 
The  second  book  is  an  accepted  continuation  of  the  first.      It 
begins  with  the  phrase  similar  to  what  we  before  observe — 
"  Now  it  came  to  pass  after  the  death  of  Saul,"  &c.      The  first 
of  Kings  is  an  obvious  continuation,  for  it  carries  on  the  history 
of  David  from  the  point  to  which  it  had  been  brought  in  the 
second  of  Samuel.     It  opens  thus  :  "  Now  King  David  was 
old  and  stricken  in  years."     The  second  of  Kings  is,  of  course, 
a  continuation  of  the  first.      It  concludes  the  history  of  Aha- 
ziah,    not  brought   to   a  close  in  the  first,  and  begins  thus  : 
"  Then  Moab  rebelled  against  Israel"      From  Moses  to  Ezra  is 
just  a  thousand  years,  according  to  the  current  chronology,  and 
yet  the  learned  find  the   dialect,  and  even  the  orthography, 
used,  unaltered  throughout  the  writings   which  embrace  the 
period.      Dr  Wall,  while  labouring  to  maintain  the  integrity  of 
the  record,  has  to  admit  that  "  the  style  introduced  by  him 
(Moses)    was  closely   imitated  by  all   the   succeeding  Hebrew 
writers.      This  is  very  decidedly  proved  (he  observes)  by  the 
fact  that,  although  Hebrew  continued  a  living  language  for 
nine  hundred  years  after  his  time,  yet  there  is  scarcely  more 
variation  of  orthography  in  the  different  parts  of  the  Hebrew 
Scriptures  than  if  they  had  been  written  by  different  authors 
in  the  same  year;"  and  further  on  he  speaks  of  "the  con- 
tinuation,   through  the  subsequent  Hebrew  compositions,   of 
the  peculiarities  which  are  found  in  the  Pentateuch."^ 

P.— From  what  source  could  Ezra,  supposing  him  to  be  the  ^p^^^^ 


1  Giles'  Hebrew  Records,  25,  26.  _         ..   ,  .     t^    ni 

2  Inquiry  into  the  Origin  of  alphabetic  writing,  cited  by  Dr  Uiles. 


tion. 


22 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 


author  of  these  books,  have  derived  his  materials  ?     Is  it  to  be 

thought  that  he  wrote  by  inspiration  ? 

^— There  is  ample  ground  for  concluding  that  he  wrote  as 

any  other  may  have  written,  from  ancient  records  and  legends, 

assisted  by  tradition,  and  probably  also   by  his  imagmation. 

There  are  in  these  books  evident  marks  of  compilation. 

(1 )  Throuo-h  the  Pentateuch  there  run  numerous  passages, 

interwoven  wfth  one  another,  some  where  God  is  referred  to  by 

the  term  "  Elohim,"  and  others  where  he  is  styled  "  Jehovab. 

These  indicate  separate  naiTatives  combined  together,  and  fre- 
quently very  inartificially.-^ 

(2  )  There  are  two  accounts  of  the  creation,  one  reaching 
from  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis  to  the  third  verse  of  the 
second  chapter,  and  the  other  from  that  point  to  the  end  ot 
the  chapter.  These  would  seem  to  have  been  m  like  manner 
drawn  from  different  records. 

(3 )  Chapter  iv.  ends  with  the  birth  of  Seth  and  his  son 
Enos.  Chapter  v.  opens  with  apparently  a  fresh  narrative, 
-This  is  the  book  of  the  generations  of  Adam;"  and  then 
there  is  an  account  of  the  creation  of  Adam  and  Eve,  and  of 
the  birth  of  Seth  and  Enos,  as  if  these  facts  were  then  stated 

for  the  first  time.  ,    -u  xi,        i 

(4  )  In  chapter  vi.  is  the  command  to  Noah  to  build  the  ark, 
and  to  enter  it  together  with  two  of  each  kind  of  animals ; 
and  it  concludes  by  saying,  "  Thus  did  Noah  ;  according  to  all 
that  God  commanded  him,  so  did  he."  After  this,  the  seventh 
chapter  opens  with  an  order  to  Noah  to  go  into  the  ark,  and 
to  take  with  him  the  animals,  as  if  no  such  order  had  been 

before  given.  « 

(5  )  There  was  ten  years'  difference  between  the  ages  ot 
Abraham  and  Sarah  (Gen.  xvii.  17).  Abraham  was  seventy- 
five  when  he  left  Haran  (xii.  4),  and  Sarah  consequently  was 
sixty-five.  At  this  age  she  attracted  the  admiration  of  the 
king  of  Ecrypt,  before  whom  Abraham,  to  avoid  risks  to  him- 
self, passed  her  off  as  his  sister.  The  king  of  Egypt  fell  into 
the  snare,  and  suffered  accordingly  at  the  hand  of  God  (Gen. 
xii  11-20).  After  she  was  ninety  (xvii.  17),  Abimelech, 
kin-  of  Gerar,  took  a  fancy  to  her,  Abraham  having  on  this 
occasion  also  passed  her  off  for  his  sister  ;  and  again  she  is 
1  Bishop  Colenso,  II.,  175-185;  IV.,  19-79;  V.,  12-68. 


V 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 


23 


protected  by  the  interposition  of  God  (Gen.  xx.  2-13).  Isaac, 
to  save  himself  from  peril,  says  that  Rebekah  is  his  sister, 
and  Abimelech  of  Gerar,  here  called  king  of  the  Philistines, 
finding  her  to  be  his  wife,  upbraids  him  for  the  risk  of  incur- 
ring guilt,  into  which,  by  his  misrepresentation,  he  had 
brought  his  people  (Gen.  xxvi.  1,  6-11).  The  circumstances 
are  all  so  correspondent,  that  these  narratives  look  like  a  mul- 
tiplication of  the  same  incident,  appearing  in  different  docu- 
ments, of  which  a  compiler  made  use.  The  introduction  of 
the  same  personage  Abimelech,  as  associated  with  Abraham 
and  Isaac  at  an  interval  of  nearly  a  hundred  years,  is  a  feature 
bespeaking  such  confusion. 

(6.)  Abraham  was  a  hundred  years  old  when  a  son  was 
promised  him,  to  the  wonderment  of  Sarah  (Gen.  xvii.  17). 
Accordingly,  Isaac  is  born  to  him  in  his  '•  old  age  "  (Gen.  xxi. 
2,  3).  "  Therefore,  sprang  there,"  it  is  said  of  this  miracu- 
lous birth,  ''  even  of  one,  and  him  as  good  as  dead,  so  many 
as  the  stars  of  the  sky  in  multitude  "  (Heb.  xi.  1 2).  Sarah 
dies  when  she  was  a  hundred  and  twenty-seven  years  old 
(Gen.  xxiii.  1).  This  brings  Abraham  up  to  a  hundred  and 
thirty-seven.  After  which  we  are  told,  "  Then  again  Abraham 
took  a  wife,"  and  by  her  had  six  sons  (Gen.  xxv.  1,  2).  Here, 
also,  there  has  probably  been  a  misplacement  of  independent 
documents  introduced  by  the  compiler. 

(7.)  Exodus  xix.  ends  with  Moses  going  down  from  Mount 
Sinai  to  speak  to  the  people.  The  next  chapter  begins  with 
God  addressing  him  as  still  on  the  Mount  :  "  And  God  spake 
all  these  words,  saying,  "  I  am  the  Lord  thy  God,  which  have 
brought  thee  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt."  After  which  follow 
the  Ten  Commandments.  Here  there  must  have  been  a 
transposition  of  materials.  And  then  the  commandments  are 
again  given  forth  (Deut.  v.  6-21)  as  if  they  had  not  already 

been  published. 

(8.)  "  Wherefore,  they  that  speak  in  proverbs,  say,  Come 
into  Heshbon,"  &c.  (Num.  xxi.  27-30).  This,  then,  is  a 
manifest  quotation  from  some  other  record  ;  and  we  find  its 
matter,  given  almost  in  the  same  words,  in  Jer.  xlviii.  45,  46. 
Both  passages  may  come  from  some  common  document,  or 
else  Numbers  quotes  from  Jeremiah,  which  makes  a  palpable 
anachronism. 


s?  ^■jKfiS!'^*''*^''''^'* 


g^^^  .  .sw^P»«««*H1I^W«8 


mms>'*mimmi 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 


25 


24 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 


(9 )  The  Lord  tells  Samuel  of  Saul,  and  says  that  he  is  to 
anoint  him  "  to  be  captain  over  my  people  Israel,  that  he  may 
save  my  people  out  of  the  hand  of  the  Philistines  ;  for  I  have 
looked  upon  my  people,  because  their  cry  is  come  unto  rne^ 
God   accordingly  points   out   Saul,   and   Samuel   anoints  him 
king  (1  Sam.  ix.  15-17  ;  x.  1).     But  further  on,  Samuel  says 
to  the  people,  "  Ye  have   this   day  rejected  your  God,    who 
himself  saved  you  out  of  all  your  adversities  and  your  tribu- 
lations;   and  ye  have  said  unto   him,  Nay,  but  set   a  king 
over  us  ;"  after  which  he  proceeds  to  ascertam  who  is  to   be 
the  king  by  casting  lots,  and  the  lot  indicates  Saul  (1   Sam. 
X.   19-21).     These  inconsistent  accounts,  and  double  action, 
come  apparently  from  different  sources.  , ,    „  ,        ,   , 

(10)  "The   Spirit   of  the   Lord,"  we   axe  told,  "departed 
from  Saul,  and   an  evil  spirit  from  the  Lord  troubled  him. 
His  servants  recommend  him  to  employ  a  harpist  to  allay  this 
spirit ;   and  they  name  as  one  a  son  of  Jesse.     Saul,  thereupon, 
sends  to   Jesse,  saying,   "  Send  me  David  thy  son,  which  is 
with  the  sheep."      David,  accordingly,  is  brought  to  him,  and 
Saul  "  loved  him  greatly,  and  he  became  his  armour-bearer ; 
and  at  the  same  time  David  habitually  played  before  him  on 
the  harp,  and  drove  away  the  evil   spirit  when  it  came  upon 
him  (1   Sam.  xvi.  14-23):     After  this  is  David's  combat  with 
Goliath.     We  are  then  introduced  to  him  as  one  we  had  not 
before  heard  of.      "  Now  David  was  the  son  of  that  Ephrathite 
of  Bethlehem-Judah,  whose  name  was  Jesse."     He  is  at  this 
time   not  with  Saul,  but  tending  his  father's  sheep.      Saul 
seeing  him  go  forth  to  the  fight,  asks  Abner,  "  Whose  son  is 
this  youth?"  and   Abner   cannot  tell  him.      And  when  he 
returns  from  the  slaughter  of  the  Philistine,  Saul  asks  him 
"  Whose  son  art  thou,  young  man  ?     And   David  answered,  I 
am  the  son  of  thy  servant  Jesse  the  Bethlehemite  "  (1  Sam. 
xvii   12,  55-58).     It  is  evident  that  the  compiler  had  before 
him'  two'  accounts  of  the  manner  in  which  David  came  to  be 
brought  to  the  notice  of  Saul,  and  must  have  misarranged  his 

(11  )  "  And  Saul  cast  the  javelin  ;  for  he  said,  I  will  smite 
David  even  to  the  wall  with  it"  (1   Sam.  xviii.   11).     "  And 
Saul  sought  to  smite  David  even  to  the  wall  with  the  javelin 
1  Sam.  xix.   10).     It  is,  of  course,  quite  possible  that  there 


may  have  been  two  such  occurrences ;  but  seeing  what  has 
been  done  elsewhere,  the  similarity  of  the  two  statements 
raises  the  suspicion  that  here  also  there  has  been  a  redupli- 

cation  of  event.  ,        ,  , 

(12)  The  thirty-first  chapter  of  the  1st  of  Samuel,  and  1 
Chron.  X.   1-12,  containing  an  account  of  the  circumstances 
of  Saul's  death,  agree  so  closely  in  faxjts,  arrangement,  and 
language,  that  it  is  obvious  they  have  been  copied,  the  one 
from  the  other,  or  else  taken  from  a  common  docume'^t-   J-^^ 
same  is  true  of  Gen.  xxxvi.  31-43,  -^^ /^  ^hron.  .  43^o4 
givin-  the  genealogy  of  the  descendants  of  Esau  ;  of  2  Kings, 
from°the  13th  verse  of  chapter  xviii.,  through  chapter  xix., 
to  the  19th  verse  of  chapter  xx.,  and  the  thirty-sixth  thirty- 
seventh,   thirty-eighth,   and   tl^irtj-ninth    chapters    of  Isaiah 
relating  to  passages  in  the  Ufe  of  Hezekiah  ;  and  of  E  j  lu 
and  Neh.  vii.   6-73,  respecting  those  who   came  out  ot   tne 

^tsTxhetSf  Kings  gives  the  history  of  the  rulers  of 
Judah  and  Israel.  The  Book  of  Chronicles  goes  over  the  same 
ground  as  respects  the  rulers  of  Judah,  and  bemg  thus  super- 
added, affords  in  itself  evidence  of  composition,  with  use  of  prior 

materials.  .,  ,  >^t,+c    Prior     re- 

That  in  the  preparation  of  these  records  older  documents  ^„^^^e 
were  maxle  use  of,  is  rendered  quite  apparent  by  the  citation  useot. 
of  numerous  such  writings  on  which  the   compiler  depends. 

The  older  works  so  cited  are ; 

The  Book  of  the  Wars  of  the  Lord.     Num.  xxi   14. 

The  Book  of  Jasher.     Josh.  x.  13  ;   2  Sam.  i.  18 
The  Book  of  the  Acts  of  Solomon.      1  Kings  xi.  41. 
The  Book  of  the  Chronicles  of  the  Kings  of  Israel      1  Kings 
xiv.  19,  and  eighteen  other  places  in  the  books  of  Kings  ;  also 

2  Chron.  xx.  34,  and  xxxiii.  18.  ,  v  ^  ^irr   9q 

The  Chronicles  of  the  Kings  of  Judah.      1  Kings  xiv.  29, 
and  twelve  other  places  in  the  books  erf  Kings. 

The  Book  of  Samuel  the  Seer.      1  Chron.  xxix.  29. 

The  Book  of  Nathan  the  Prophet.      1  Chron^xxix.  29 

The  Book  of  Gad  the  Seer.      1  Chron.  xxix.  29. 

The  Chronicles  of  King  David.      1  Chron.  xx^'rl.  24. 

The  Book  of  Nathan  the  Prophet.      2  Chron^  ix.  29. 

The  Prophecy  of  Ahijah  the  Shilomite.      2  Chron.  ix.  29. 


ik 


26 


THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 


The  Visions  of  Iddo  the  Seer  against  Jeroboam  the  son  of 
Nabat.      2  Chron.  ix.  29. 

The  Book  of  Shemaiah  the  Prophet.      2  Chron.  xii.  15. 

The   Book   of   Iddo  the    Seer  concerning   genealogies.      2 
Chron.  xii.  15. 

The  story  of  the  Prophet  Iddo.      2  Chron.  xiii.  22. 

The  Book  of  the  Kings  of  Judah  and  Israel      2  Chron.  xvi. 
11,  and  six  other  places  in  the  same  book. 

The  Book  of  Jehu.     2  Chron.  xx.  34. 

P. — Where  are  these  ancient  Writings  ?     Have  they  been 
preserved  ? 

S. — They  have  not. 

P. — Were  they  inspired  ? 

S. — No  one  alleges  this. 

P. — How  could  inspired  records  have  to  depend  on  such  as 
were  not  inspired  ? 

S. — That  I  cannot  explain. 

P. — Thank  you.  I  will  not  trouble  you  farther  on  the 
present  occasion.  I  feel  how  dangerous  it  is  to  take  things 
for  granted,  on  the  faith  of  others,  and  without  examination. 
I  am  certain  that  those  who  put  this  book  into  my  hands  as 
inspired  by  God,  and  safely  conveyed  to  us  from  remote  times, 
under  his  superintending  care,  cannot  themselves  have  an  idea 
how  the  evidence  of  its  authorship,  of  its  safe  custody,  and  of 
its  transmission,  disappears  at  every  turn,  as  we  inquire  for  its 
existence.  At  a  future  day  I  will  ask  you  to  enable  me  to 
judge  of  the  pretensions  of  the  remaining  portion  of  the  Bible, 
which  is  called  the  New  Testament,  to  be  a  divine  record. 


r  imiiiniim! 


THE  N"EW  TESTAMENT. 


1 


II. 

RENEWED  CONVERSATION  BETWEEN  PUNDIT  AND  STUDENT. 

Pundit The  New  Testament  comes  from  an  age  suffi-  AuftorsWp 

ciently  near  our  own  to  allow,  possibly,  of  the  circumstances  »      "^ ' 
under  which  it   was  put  forth  being  traceable.     Who  were 
Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and  John,  to  whom  the  four  gospel 

narratives  are  ascribed  ?  ,.       j      i 

Student  —Matthew  and  John  are  currently  believed  to  have 

been  apostles  of  Jesus,  and    Mark   and  Luke  companions  of 

Peter  and  Paul  respectively. 

P._Did  these  persons  write  the  gospels  which  bear  their 

names  ? 

S It  cannot  be  said  that  they  did. 

p._On  what   authority  are    these   writings  attributed  to 

them  ?  ,  ,  ,,  „ 

S— It  has  been   thought  that  they  may  have   been    the 

authors  of  them,  but  the  fact  is  not  positively  alleged.     These 

gospels  are  not  described  as   by  Matthew,  by  Mark,  &c.,  as 

would  have  been  the  case  had  their  authorship  been  actual  y 

known;  but  only  as  according  to  Matthew,  accordtng  to  Mark, 

&c. 

p What  does  that  amount  of  assertion  mean  ? 

S_That  the  narratives  are  such  as  are  worthy  to  be  at- 
tributed to  these  persons,  and  which  the  church  may  ax:cept 
with  as  much  confidence  a^  if  it  were  really  known  that  they 

did  write  them.  i.i,     ^      , 

p_When  were  these  gospels  first  known  of  among  the  Go^is_^ 

early  Christians  ?  ,       ^        ,  ''■'»™°'- 

S.—The  first  Christian  writer  who  speaks  of  such  works  was 


28 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


a  bishop  named  Papias,  who  died  by  martyrdom  about  the 
year  164,  that  is,  about  a  hundred  and  thirty  years  after  the 
death  of  Jesus.  He  says,  "  Matthew  composed  his  history  in 
the  Hebrew  dialect,  and  every  one  translated  it  as  he  was  able." 
And  of  Mark  he  says,  "  And  John  the  presbyter  also  said  this, 
Mark  being  the  interpreter  of  Peter,  whatsoever  he  recorded 
he  wrote  with  great  accuracy,  but  not,  however,  in  the  order 
in  which  it  was  spoken  or  done  by  our  Lord,  for  he  neither 
heard  nor  followed  our  Lord,  but,  as  before  said,  he  was  in 
company  with  Peter,  who  gave  him  such  instruction  as  was 
necessary,  but  not  to  give  a  history  of  our  Lord's  discourses ; 
wherefore  Mark  has  not  erred  in  an3rthing,  by  writing  some 
things  as  he  has  recorded  them  ;  for  he  was  carefully  attentive 
to  one  thing,  not  to  pass  by  anything  that  he  heard,  or  to  state 
anything  falsely  in  these  accounts."^  The  first  to  whom  a 
direct  reference  to  the  four  gospels  can  be  traced  is  Irenseus,  who 
flourished  about  A.D.  178.^  "  There  is  no  evidence,"  says 
Dr  Giles,  "that  they  existed  earlier  than  the  middle  of  the 
second  century,  for  they  are  not  named  by  any  writer  who 
lived  before  that  time."^ 

P. — Can  you  identify  the  productions  spoken  of  by  these 
writers  with  the  gospel  records  themselves. 

S. — No.  It  is  evident  that  the  gospel  we  have,  to  which 
the  name  of  Matthew  is  attached,  is  not  the  one  adverted  to 
by  Papias,  for  he  spoke  of  a  writing  in  Hebrew,  while  what  we 
have  is  in  Greek  ;  nor  does  the  gospel  according  to  Mark  cor- 
respond with  his  description  of  what  Mark  wrote  ;  for  what  we 
have  is  an  orderly  narrative,  but  what  he  describes  is  a  miscel- 
laneous collection  of  anecdotes,  taken  down  from  time  to  time 
as  they  fell  from  the  lips  of  Peter.  The  existing  gospels,  with 
which  the  names  of  Matthew  and  Mark  are  connected,  are 
therefore  certainly  not  those  of  which  Papias  knew.  Nor 
are  there  means  for  satisfying  ourselves,  positively,  that  the  four 
gospels  particularized  by  Irenseus  are  the  very  same  that  we 
now  have.'* 

P. — May  not  the  existing  gospel  according  to  Matthew  be 
a  translation  of  his  Hebrew  gospel  ? 


>  EusebiuB  Ecc.  Hist.  iii.  39. 

2  Bishop  Herbert  Marsh's  Illustration  of  Hypothesis,  50,  and  Giles'  Christian 
Records,  90,  92.  » Christian  Records,  56.  *  Idem,  95. 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


29 


S.— It  does  not  purport  to  be  such,  nor  is  there  any  infor- 
mation whatsoever  to  connect  it  with  the  Hebrew  gospel, 
p. What  claims  to  credibility  have  Papias  and  Irenaeus 

left  behind  them  ?  .     j  r  i, 

^._Papias  gives  an  instance  of  one  being  raised  from  the 
dead  in  his  time,  and  of  another  drinking  deadly  poison  with- 
out hurt.^     This  shows  him  to  have  been  a  credulous  person. 
Eusebius  held  him  in  light  esteem.      He  said,  ''  he  was  very 
limited  in  his  comprehension,  as  is  evident  from  his  discourses  ; 
yet  he  was  the  cause  why  most  of  the  ecclesiastical  writers, 
urging   the   antiquity  of  the   man,   were   carried  away  by  a 
similar   opinion,    as,   for    instance,   Irenseus."  ^       Irenseus   was 
equally  credulous.      He  believed  in  the  power  of  the  church 
to  raise  the  dead,  to  cast  out  demons,  to  prophesy  future  events, 
and  to  speak  in  all  languages.^     "  Irenaeus,"  says  Dr  Davidson 
"  was  an  uncritical  and  credulous  man.      On  the  authonty  ot 
the  elders  who  saw  John  the  apostle,  he  believed  Jesus  to  have 
taught  that  in  the  millennium  vines  would  spring  up,  each 
having    ten    thousand    stems,    and    one    stem    ten    thousand 
branches,  and  on  ea^h  branch  ten  thousand  shoots,  and  on  each 
shoot  ten  thousand  clusters,  and  on  each  cluster  ten  thousand 
^apes,  and  ea^^h  grape  when  pressed  would  give  twenty-five 
measures  of  wine,  and  when  any  of  the  saints  shall  have  taken 
hold   of  one   cluster,  another   shall   cry  out,  I   am   ^  better 
cluster,   take  me,   through   me    bless   the   Lord."       He   had 
fanciful  reasons  for  believing  that  there  were  four  gospels,  and 
could  be  but  four  ;  uamely,  because  the  world  consisted  of  four 
quartern,  because  there   were  four   chief  winds,   and  because 
Ezekiel's  cherubim  had  four  different  forms.^     The  evidence  of 
Iren^us  is  greatly  depended  upon,  as  he  had  personal  know- 
ledcre  of  Polycarp,  a  disciple  of  the  apostle  John.      But  Dr 
Davidson  points  out  that  his  acquaintance  with  Polycarp  was 
when  he  was  a  mere  boy,  and  that  his  recollections,  after  the 
lapse  of  years,  would  probably  be  confused  or  coloured.      Dr 
Davidson's  conclusion   is,  "  that  Irenaeus  had  no  authonty  for 
assigning  the  fourth  Gospel  to  John,"  (this  gospel  being  the 
subject  of  the  essay),  "  except  a  vague  ecclesiastical  tradition.^ 
Could  he  have  appealed  to  Polycarp,  he  would  have  done  so. 

1  Eusebius  Ec  Hist.  iii.  39.  ^  Hem,  iii.  39.  •  Idem,  v.  7- 

*  Theological  Review,  No,  XXX.,  301.        '  Idem,  304. 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


31 


30 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


II. 


Inspiration 
of  Gospels. 


His  references,  he  notices,  ''are  vague,  consisting  at  times  of 
secondary,  unreliable  traditions.  He  listened  to  reports.  If 
he  treasured  up  Polycarp's  words,  why  does  he  not  quote  them 
even  for  the  disputed  authenticity  of  the  fourth  gospel  ?  The 
only  answer  is,  that  Polycarp  had  said  nothing  about  it. 
Why  ?  Because  he  was  unacquainted  with  the  work.  How 
could  he  speak  of  it  about  140  A.D.  (the  age  of  Justin),  if 
Justin  himself  did  not  know  of  its  existence  ?"^ 

P.— It  appears,  then,  that  the  evidence  is  wanting  just 
where  it  is  most  required.  For  about  a  century  and  a  half 
after  the  events  in  question,  there  is  no  recognized  record  of 
them,  and  the  first  notices  that  are  given  of  such  records  as 
there  now  are,  come  from  credulous  persons,  without  sohd 
information,  and  whose  judgment  should  be  of  no  weight  on 
any  matter.       Is  any  light  thrown   on  the  subject  by  other 

early  writers  ? 

S, There  are  writings   attributed  to  Barnabas,   Clement, 

Ignatius,  Polycarp,  and  Hermas,  who  are  called  Apostolic 
Fathers,  as  they  lived  in  the  age  of  the  apostles,  and  may  be 
supposed  to  have  had  personal  intercourse  with  them.  ''  There 
is  not  a  single  sentence,"  Dr  Giles  assures  us,  "  in  all  their  re- 
maining works,  in  which  a  clear  allusion  to  the  New  Testament 
is  to  be  found."  They  "  do  actually  quote  Moses,  and  other 
Old  Testament  writers,  by  name,  '  Moses  hath  said,'  '  But  Moses 
says,'  &c.,  in  numerous  passages,  but  we  nowhere  meet  with 
the  words,  '  Matthew  hath  said  in  his  gospel,'  '  John  hath 
said'  &c.  They  always  quote,  not  the  words  of  the  evan- 
gelists, but  the  words  of  Christ  himself  directly,  which 
furnishes  the  strongest  presumption,  that,  though  the  sayings 
of  Christ  were  in  general  vogue,  yet  the  evangelical  histories, 
into  which  they  were  afterwards  embodied,  were  not  then  in 

bein^." 

p°_Do  the  existing  gospel  narratives  profess  to  have  been 

insmred  . 

^._Inspiration  is  currently  imputed  to  them,  but  the  writ- 
ings themselves  contain  no  such  avowal.  Two  of  them,  in  fact, 
warrant  a  contrary  conclusion,  namely,  that  they  make  no  such 
pretension.  The  author  of  the  gospel  according  to  Luke  gives 
an  account  of  the  circumstances  under  which  he  wrote,  and  of 

1  Theological  Review,  302,  304.  ^  Christian  Records,  52. 


his  means  of  information.      ''  Forasmuch  as  many  have  taken 
in  hand   to  set  forth  in  order  a  description   of  those  things 
which  have  been  brought  to  fulfilment  in  us,  even  as  they, 
which  from  the  beginning  were  eye-witnesses,  and  ministers  of 
the  word,  have  handed  down  to  us;  it  seemed  good  to  me  also, 
following  all  accurately  from  the  beginning,  to  write  unto  thee 
in  ordel^  most  excellent  Theophilus,  that  thou  mightest  know 
the  certainty  of  those  things,  wherein  thou  hast  been  instructed.'^ 
(i.  1-4).      I  adopt  here  an  amended  translation  by  Dr  Giles. 
The  writer  in  Luke  does  not  say,  as  do  those  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, ''  Thus  saith  the  Lord,"  but  tells  us  that  he  has  written 
this  Account  of  his  own  mind  and  accord,  as  it  ''seemed  good" 
to  him;  and  upon  materials  such  as   "many"  others  had  used 
for  a  like  purpose;   namely,  the  statements  of  credible  wit- 
nesses.     This  history,  therefore,  is  avowedly  of  human  author- 
ship, just  as  any  ordinary  history  would  be.     The  writer  of 
the  gospel  according  to  John,  appeals,  in  like  manner,  not  to 
inspiration,  but  to  credible  testimony,  and  this  simply  his  own. 
"  This  is   the  disciple,"  he   says,    "  which  testifieth  of  these 
things,  and  wrote  these  things  :  and  we  know  that  his  testi- 
mony is  true."     Who  he  is  he  does  not  say,   save  that  he 
comes  forward  as  one  of  the  apostles,  namely  one  "whom  Jesus 
loved,  which    also  leaned  on  his  breast  at  supper,  and    said, 
Lord,'  which  is  he  that  betrayeth  thee  ; "  nor  is  it  explained 
who  the  "  we"  are  who  were  so  satisfied  with  his  "  testimony." 
The  passage,  in  fact,  has  the  appearance  of  coming  from  one 
who  was  not  himself  the  author.      Then  he  shows  that  he  had 
made  his  own  selection  of  the  matters   recorded    by  him,  and 
might  have  communicated  much  more  had  he  been  so  minded  ; 
clelrly  therefore   implying  that  he  was  not  acting  under  the 
dictation  or  special  instruction  of  God.      "  And  there  are  also 
many  other  things  which  Jesus  did,  the  which,  if  they  should  be 
written  every  one,  I  suppose  that  even  the  world  itself  could  not 
contain  the  books  that  should  be  written  "  (xxi.  20-25).      This 
in  itself  is  hyperbolical  language,  not  having  the  character  of 
inspired   truth.      When  we  find,  out  of  four  narratives,  all  of 
the  same  stamp,  and  put  forth  for  the  same  purpose,  two  laying 
no  claim  to  inspiration,  but  admittedly  drawn  from  mere  human 
resources,  it  is  fair  to  conclude  that  the  other  two,  which  equally 

1  Christian  Records,  97,  98. 


32 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


Apocryphal 
writings. 


advance  no  claim  to  inspiration,  are,  in  like  manner,  of  purely 
human  origin. 

P. — Luke  refers  to  the  existence  of  many  other  narratives 
such  as  his  own.  Are  there  indications  of  other  writings, 
beyond  those  which  make  up  the  New  Testament,  being  current 
among  the  early  Christians,  and  if  so,  what  was  thought  of 
them  ? 

S, — There  are  abundant  notices  of  such  writings,  and  some 
of  them  appear  to  have  been  accepted  with  as  much  respect  as 
those  embodied  in  the  New  Testament.  It  was  the  habit  of 
eminent  teachers  of  Christianity  to  address  epistles  to  the  various 
gatherings  or  churches,  which  were  read  to  them  and  inter- 
changed between  them.  The  epistles  ascribed  to  Paul  are  of 
this  stamp,  and  were  thus  read  and  circulated.  "  I  charge 
you,"  the  writer  says,  "  by  the  Lord,  that  this  epistle  be  read 
unto  all  the  holy  brethren  "  (1  Thess.  v.  27).  "  And  when  this 
epistle  is  read  among  you,  cause  that  it  be  read  also  in  the 
church  of  the  Laodiceans,  and  that  ye  likewise  read  the  epistle 
from  Laodicea  "  (Col.  iv.  16).  In  like  manner,  of  the  apostolic 
fathers,  Clement  of  Rome  wrote  to  the  Corinthians,  Poly  carp 
of  Smyrna  to  the  Philippians,  and  Ignatius  of  Antioch  to 
various  churches  of  Asia  Minor,  and  these  communications  were 
circulated  to  other  churches.^  Clement  refers  to  the  writings 
of  the  "  Blessed  Judith  "  in  the  same  line  that  he  alludes  to 
those  of  the  "  Blessed  Paul,"  and  he  cites  the  "  Book  of 
Wisdom  "  with  as  much  respect  as  the  epistles  incorporated  in 
the  New  Testament.*  Dr  Giles  informs  us  that  "  the  aposto- 
lical fathers  quote  sayings  of  Christ  which  are  not  found  in 
our  gospels,"  and  which  consequently  came  from  other  sources; 
and  he  instances  one  such  put  forward  by  Barnabas,  namely, 
*'  Those  who  wish  to  see  me,  and  to  touch  my  kingdom,  nmst 
be  contrite  and  suffering  and  so  take  hold  of  me."  He  also 
tells  us  that  Papias  mentions  the  Gospel  of  the  Hebrews, 
"  with  quite  as  much  respect  as  those  of  Matthew  and  Mark,^ 
{i.e.,  those  gospels  of  Matthew  and  Mark  he  describes).  Dennis, 
Bishop  of  Corinth,  who  lived  in  the  latter  half  of  the  second 
century,  in  a  letter  addressed  by  him  to  the  Romans,  speaks 
of   the   Romans   having  written  to  the   Corinthians  a  letter 


*  Histoire  du  Canon,  par  E.  Eeuss,  22,  23. 

^  Christian  Records,  52,  53,  65. 


2  Idem,  26,  27. 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


83 


1 1 


which  had  been  read  out  on  Sunday,  as  one  written  formerly 
by  Clement  had  been.^  Justyn  Martyr,  who  wrote  about  the 
year  140,  considered  the  Sibyl,  and  the  writings  of  one  Hys- 
taspes,  to  be  as  much  inspired  as  the  Old  Testament.  He 
says,  the  *'  Memoirs  of  the  Apostles"  were  read  out  in  the  Sunday 
meetings,  and  that  their  title  to  reception  consisted  in  the 
support  they  derived  from  the  prophecies  of  the  Old  Testament, 
the  fulfilment  of  which  they  recount.  He  does  not  mention 
the  existing  gospels  by  name,  and  gives  particulars  not  appear- 
ing in  them,  and  which  he  consequently  must  have  had  from 
some  other  source.  For  example,  he  never  takes  account  of 
the  genealogy  of  Jesus  as  associated  with  Joseph,  which  is  the 
statement  of  genealogy  in  Matthew  and  Luke,  but  relies  on 
that  of  Mary  as  derived  from  David,  which  is  not  given  in  the 
received  gospels  ;  he  particularizes  that  the  wise  men,  who,  in 
the  gospels,  are  said  to  have  come  from  the  East,  came  from 
that  part  of  the  East  known  as  Arabia  ;  he  says  that  Jesus  was 
born  in  a  cave  near  the  village  of  Bethlehem  ;  that  when  he 
was  baptized,  the  river  Jordan  gave  forth  a  miraculous  fire  ; 
that  Jesus  worked  as  a  carpenter  in  the  construction  of  ploughs 
and  other  agricultural  implements,  and  that  all  the  disciples 
denied  their  Lord  after  his  resurrection.  He  also  gives  various 
sayings  of  Jesus,  which  are  not  in  the  received  gospels.^  Dr 
Giles  further  points  out  that  Justin  particularizes  that  the  ass's 
foal  on  which  Jesus  rode  into  Jerusalem  was  tied  to  a  vine 
outside  the  village  ;  that  at  his  trial  the  soldiers  mocked  him, 
placing  him  "  on  a  tribunal,"  and  saying,  "  Give  judgment  for 
us;"  and  that  one  of  the  utterances  of  Jesus  was,  "  In  what- 
soever things  I  shall  apprehend  you,  in  those  also  will  I  judge 
you,"  matters  none  of  which  are  in  the  current  gospels.^  A 
great  number  of  spurious  works  were  put  forth  in  the  second  cen- 
tury, as  if  productions  of  the  previous  century.*  Irenaeus  cited 
the  Epistle  of  Clement  and  the  pastor  of  Hermas.^  "  No  one," 
says  Giles,  *'  ventures  to  say  that  the  work  of  Hermas  is 
genuine."^  Clement  of  Alexandria,  one  of  the  great  theolo- 
gians of  the  second  century,  accepted  as  scripture  the  Pastor  of 
Hermas,  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas,  and  the  Epistle  of  Clement 
to  the  Corinthians,  and  various  other  Apocrypha,  such  as  the 


1  Reuss,  43,  44. 
4  Reuss,  75. 


2  Reuss,  51-59. 
6  Reuss,  112. 
C 


3  Christian  Records,  79. 
6  Christian  Records,  55. 


t^i!M»Kwis*a«!^(aw*  *"'  "S#!*"* 


34 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


35 


Apocalypse  and  preaching  of  Peter,  the  Gospel  of  the  Hebrews, 
the  Gospel  of  the  Egjrptians,  the  Traditions  of  the  Apostle 
Matthias,  and  a  pretended  work  of  Paul,  in  which  the  Sibyl 
and  the  prophecy  of  Hystaspes  were  recommended.^  The 
Gospel  according  to  the  Egyptians  is  mentioned  by  Origen 
and  quoted  from  by  Clement  of  Alexandria.^  There  are  accounts 
of  the  Apocrjrphal  Gospels,  carrying  their  number  to  fifty  and 
upwards.  There  remain  now  but  seven. ^  Besides  Justyn 
Martyr,  Irenaeus,  and  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Tertullian  also 
makes  use  of  them.^  There  were,  furthermore,  thirty-six 
Apocryphal  Acts,  and  twelve  spurious  Apocalypses.^ 

P. — Are  there  traces  of  the  gospels  being  derived  from  any 
prior  writings,  so  as  to  interfere  with  their  title  to  be  accepted 
as  original  and  independent  documents  ? 
Corres-  S. — The  gospel  according  to  John  stands  out  distinct  from 

of^yriopti-  ^^^  others,  and  has  to  be  considered  separately.  The  other 
cai  gospels,  three  occupy  the  same  range  of  narration,  grounded  on  closely 
corresponding  materials.  Out  of  the  many  speeches  that  must 
have  fallen  from  Jesus,  and  the  many  miracles  said  to  have 
been  wrought  by  him,  they  so  frequently  make  the  same  selec- 
tion as  to  demonstrate  unity  of  action,  from  whatever  cause 
proceeding.  They  also  contain  numerous  passages  so  closely 
resembling  one  another,  in  respect  of  matter,  arrangement,  and 
language,  that  it  is  obvious  the  writers  must  have  copied  from 
one  another,  or  else  from  some  common  document.  But  as 
they  also  at  times  differ  seriously,  the  presumption  is  that  they 
made  use  of  surrounding  materials  at  their  discretion,  some- 
times following  one  of  the  earlier  narratives,  and  sometimes 
another.  Here  are  instances  where  it  is  plain  they  had  a 
common  document  in  use. 

Matt.  ix.                       Mark  ii.  Luke  v. 

2.  Jesus    seeing        5.  When    Jesus  20.    And    when 

their  faith,  said  unto  saw  their  faith,  he  he    saw  their  faith, 

the  sick  of  the  palsy,  said  unto  the  sick  of  he    said  unto    him, 

1  Eeuss,  121.  2  Christian  Records,  274. 

3  Origin  and  Hist,  of  the  Books  of  the  New  Testament.    By  Professor  0.  E. 
Stowe,  186,  187. 
*  Stowe,  218.  » Mackay's  Rise  and  Progress  of  Christianity,  11. 


t 


Son,  be  of  good 
cheer,  thy  sins  be 
forgiven  thee. 

3.  And,  behold, 
certain  of  the  scribes 
said  within  them- 
selves. This  man 
blasphemeth. 


the  palsy,  Son,  thy    Man,   thy    sins  are 
sins  be  forgiven  thee,    forgiven  thee. 


4.  And  Jesus, 
knowing  their 
thoughts,  said, 
Wherefore  think  ye 
evil  in  vour  hearts? 


5.  For  whether 
is  easier  to  say.  Thy 
sins  be  forgiven 
thee  ;  or  to  say. 
Arise,  and  walk  ? 


6.  But  that  ye 
may  know  that  the 
Son  of  Man  hath 
power  on  earth  to 
forgive  sins  (then 
saith  he  to  the  sick 
of  the  palsy).  Arise, 
take  up  thy  bed,  and 
go  unto  thine  house. 


6.  But  there  were 
certain  of  the  scribes 
sitting  there,  and 
reasoning  in  their 
hearts. 

7.  Why  doth 
this  man  thus  speak 
blasphemies  ?  Who 
can  forgive  sins  but 
God  only  1 

8.  And  immedi- 
ately when  Jesus 
perceived  in  his 
spirit  that  they  so 
reasoned  within 
themselves,  he  said 
unto  them.  Why 
reason  ye  these 
things  inyour  hearts? 

9.  Whether  is  it 
easier  to  say  to  the 
sick  of  the  palsy, 
Thy  sins  be  forgiven 
thee ;  or  to  say. 
Arise,  and  take  up 
thy  bed  and  walk  ? 

10.  But  that  ye 
may  know  that  the 
Son  of  Man  hath 
power  on  earth  to 
forgive  sins,  (he 
saith  to  the  sick  of 
the  palsy), 

11.  I  say  unto 
thee.  Arise,  and  take 
up  thy  bed,and  go  thy 
way  into  thine  house. 


21.  And  the 
Scribes  and  the 
Pharisees  began  to 
reason,  saying.  Who 
is  this  which  speak- 
eth  blasphemies  ? 
Who  can  forgive  sins 
but  God  alone  ? 


22.  But  when 
Jesus  perceived 
their  thoughts,  he 
answering  said  unto 
them.  What  reason 
ye  in  your  hearts  ? 


23.  Whether  is 
easier  to  say,  Thy 
sins  be  forgiven 
thee  ;  or  to  say, 
Rise  up  and  walk  ? 


24.  But  that  ye 
may  know  that  the 
Son  of  Man  hath 
power  upon  earth  to 
forgive  sins,  (he  said 
unto  the  sick  of  the 
palsy),  I  say  unto 
thee.  Arise,  and  take 
up  thy  couch,  and 
go  into  thine  house. 


36 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


7.  And  he  arose,  12.  And  imme-  25.  And  imme- 
and  departed  to  his  diatelyhe  arose,  took  diately  he  rose  up 
house.  up    the     bed,    and    before     them,     and 

went     forth    before    took  up  that  where- 
them  all.  on  he  lay,  and  de- 

parted to  his  own 
house,  glorifying 
God. 


Matt.  xxi. 

23.  And  when  he  was 
come  into  the  temple  the  chief 
priests  and  the  elders  of  the 
people  came  unto  him  as  he 
was  teaching,  and  said.  By 
what  authority  doest  thou 
these  things  ?  and  who  gave 
thee  this  authority. 

24.  And  Jesus  answered 
and  said  unto  them,  I  also 
will  ask  you  one  thing,  which, 
if  ye  tell  me,  I  in  like  wise  will 
tell  you  by  what  authority  I  do 
these  things. 

25.  The  baptism  of  John, 
whence  was  it  ?  from  heaven, 
or  of  men  ?  And  they  rea- 
soned with  themselves,  say- 
ing, If  we  shall  say,  From 
heaven  ;  he  will  say  unto  us, 
Why  did  ye  not  then  believe 
him  ? 

26.  But  if  we  shall  say.  Of 
men  ;  we  fear  the  people  ;  for 
all  hold  John  as  a  prophet. 

27.  And  they  answered 
Jesus,  and  said.  We  cannot 
tell.     And  he  said  unto  them, 


Mark  xi. 

27.  And  as  he  was  walking 
in  the  temple  there  came  to 
him  the  chief  priests,  and  the 
scribes,  and  the  elders, 

28.  And  say  unto  him.  By 
what  authority  doest  thou 
these  things  ?  and  who  gave 
thee  this  authority  to  do  these 
things  ? 

29.  And  Jesus  answered 
and  said  unto  them,  I  will  also 
ask  of  you  one  question,  and 
answer  me,  and  I  will  tell  you 
by  what  authority  I  do  these 
things. 

30.  The  baptism  of  John, 
was  it  from  heaven,  or  of  men  ? 
Answer  me. 

31.  And  they  reasoned  with 
themselves,  saying.  If  w^e  shall 
say,  From  heaven ;  he  will  say, 
Why  then  did  ye  not  believe 
him  ? 

32.  But  if  we  shall  say,  Of 
men  ;  they  feared  the  people  : 
for  all  men  counted  John,  that 
he  was  a  prophet  indeed. 

33.  And  they  answered  and 
said  unto  Jesus,  We  cannot 
tell.       And    Jesus    answering 


"SSIi»MK5?^-':SSS^SS*!!^**^r^ 


^S,^^<^-^ 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


37 


Neither   tell  I   you   by  what    saith  unto  them.   Neither  do 
authority  I  do  these  things.        I  tell  you  by  what  authority  I 


do  these  things. 


Matt.  xxiv. 

9.  .  .  .  And  ye  shall  be 
hated  of  all  nations  for  my 
name's  sake. 

13.  But  he  that  shall  en- 
dure unto  the  end,  the  same 
shall  be  saved. 

15.  When  je  therefore  shall 
see  the  abomination  of  desola- 
tion, spoken  of  by  Daniel  the 
prophet,  stand  in  the  holy 
place,  (whoso  readeth,  let  him 
understand  :) 

16.  Then  let  them  which  be 
in  Judea  flee  unto  the  moun- 
tains : 

17.  Let  him  which  is  on 
the  housetop  not  come  down 
to  take  any  thing  out  of  his 
house. 

18.  Neither  let  him  which 
is  in  the  field  return  back  to 
take  his  clothes. 

19.  And  woe  unto  them 
that  are  with  child,  and  to 
them  that  give  suck  in  those 
days  ! 

20.  But  pray  ye  that  your 
flight  be  not  in  winter,  neither 
on  the  sabbath  day  : 

21.  For  then  shall  be  great 
tribulation,  such  as  was  not 
since  the  beginning  of  the 
world  to  this  time,  nor  ever 
shall  be. 


Mark  xiii. 

13.  And  ye  shall  be  hated 
of  all  men  for  my  name's  sake : 
but  he  that  shall  endure  unto 
the  end,  the  same  shall  be 
saved. 

14.  But  when  ye  shall  see 
the  abomination  of  desolation, 
spoken  of  by  Daniel  the  pro- 
phet, standing  where  it  ought 
not,  (let  him  that  readeth  un- 
derstand,) then  let  them  that 
be  in  Judea  flee  to  the  moun- 
tains : 

15.  And  let  him  that  is  on 
the  housetop  not  go  down  into 
the  house,  neither  enter  therein, 
to  take  any  thing  out  of  his 
house. 

16.  And  let  him  that  is  in 
the  field  not  turn  back  again 
for  to  take  up  his  garment. 

17.  But  woe  to  them  that 
are  with  child,  and  to  them 
that  give  suck  in  those  days  ! 

18.  And  pray  ye  that  your 
flight  be  not  in  the  winter. 

19.  For  in  those  days  shall 
be  affliction,  such  as  was  not 
from  the  beginning  of  the 
creation  which  God  created 
unto  this  time,  neither  shall  be. 


38 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


22.  And  except  those  days 
should  be  shortened,  there 
should  no  flesh  be  saved  :  but 
for  the  elect's  sake  those  days 
shall  be  shortened. 

23.  Then  if  any  man  shall 
say  unto  you,  Lo,  here  is 
Christ,  or  there  ;  believe  it 
not. 

24.  For  there  shall  arise 
false  Christs  and  false  pro- 
phets, and  shall  show  great 
signs  and  wonders  ;  insomuch 
that,  if  it  were  possible,  they 
shall  deceive  the  very  elect. 

25.  Behold,  I  have  told  you 
before. 


29.  Immediately  after  the 
tribulation  of  those  days  shall 
the  sun  be  darkened,  and  the 
moon  shall  not  give  her  light, 
and  the  stars  shall  fall  from 
heaven,  and  the  powers  of  the 
heavens  shall  be  shaken  : 

30.  .  .  .  And  they  shall 
see  the  Son  of  man  coming  in 
the  clouds  of  heaven  with 
power  and  great  glory. 

31.  And  he  shall  send  his 
angels  with  a  great  sound  of  a 
trumpet,  and  they  shall  gather 
together  his  elect  from  the  four 
winds,  from  one  end  of  heaven 
to  the  other. 


20.  And  except  that  the 
Lord  had  shortened  those  days 
no  flesh  should  be  saved  ;  but 
for  the  elect's  sake,  whom  he 
hath  chosen,  he  hath  shortened 
the  days. 

21.  And  then,  if  any  man 
shall  say  to  you,  Lo,  here  is 
Christ;  or  lo,  he  is  there; 
believe  him  not : 

22.  For  false  Christs  and 
false  prophets  shall  rise,  and 
shall  shew  signs  and  wonders, 
to  seduce,  if  it  were  possible, 
even  the  elect. 

23.  But  take  ye  heed  :  be- 
hold, I  have  foretold  you  all 
things. 

24.  But  in  those  days,  after 
that  tribulation,  the  sun  shall 
be  darkened,  and  the  moon 
shall  not  give  her  light. 


25.  And  the  stars  of  heaven 
shall  fall,  and  the  powers  that 
are  in  heaven  shall  be  shaken. 

26.  And  then  shall  they 
see  the  Son  of  man  coming  in 
the  clouds,  with  great  power 
and  glory. 

27.  And  then  shall  he  send 
his  angels,  and  shall  gather  to- 
gether his  elect  from  the  utter- 
most part  of  the  earth  to  the 
uttermost  part  of  heaven. 


Matt.  xxiv. 
32.  Now  learn  a 


Mark  xiii. 
28.  Now  learn  a 


Luke  xxi. 
29.  .  .  .  Behold 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


39 


parable  of  the  fig 
tree  ;  When  his 
branch  is  yet  ten- 
der, and  putteth 
forth  his  leaves,  ye 
know  that  summer 
is  nigh. 


parable  of  the  fig 
tree  ;  When  her 
branch  is  yet  ten- 
der, and  putteth 
forth  leaves,  ye 
know  that  summer 
is  near: 


33.  So  likewise  29.  So  ye,  in  like 
ye,  when  ye  shall  manner,  when  ye 
see  all  these  things,  shall  see  these  things 
know  that  it  is  near,  come  to  pass,  know 
even  at  the  doors.       that  it  is  nigh,  even 

at  the  doors. 


34.  Verily  I  say 
unto  you.  This  gene- 
ration shall  not  pass 
till  all  these  things 
be  fulfilled. 

35.  Heaven  and 
earth  shall  pass 
away,  but  my  words 
shall  not  pass  away. 


30.  Verily  I  say 
unto  you,  that  this 
generation  shall  not 
pass  till  all  these 
things  be  done. 

31.  Heaven  and 
earth  shall  pass 
away,  but  my  words 
shall  not  pass  away. 


the  fig  tree,  and  all 
the  trees  ; 

30.  When  they 
now  shoot  forth,  ye 
see  and  know  of 
your  own  selves  that 
summer  is  now  nigh 
at  hand. 

31.  So  likewise 
ye,  when  ye  see 
these  things  come 
to  pass,  know  ye 
that  the  kingdom 
of  God  is  nigh  at 
hand. 

32.  Verily  I  say 
unto  you,  This  gene- 
ration shall  not  pass 
away  till  all  be  ful- 
filled. 

33.  Heaven  and 
earth  shall  pass 
away,  but  my  words 
shall  not  pass  away. 


Mark  i. 

21.  And  they  went  into 
Capernaum  ;  and  straightway 
on  the  sabbath  day  he  en- 
tered into  the  synagogue,  and 
taught. 

22.  And  they  were  asto- 
nished at  his  doctrine  :  for  he 
taught  them  as  one  that  had 
authority,  and  not  as  the 
scribes. 

23.  And  there  was  in  their 
synagogue  a  man  with  an  un- 
clean spirit ;   and  he  cried  out. 


Luke  iv. 

31.  And  came  down  to 
Capernaum,  a  city  of  Galilee, 
and  taught  them  on  the  sab- 
bath day.  • 

32.  And  they  were  asto- 
nished at  his  doctrine  :  for  his 
word  was  with  power. 

33.  And  in  the  synagogue 
there  was  a  man,  which  had  a 
spirit  of  an  unclean  devil,  and 
cried  out  with  a  loud  voice, 


ii   J- 


S*^l«*»«5WS5P5SKW%e-i"'« 


40 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


41 


24.  Saying,  Let  us  alone  ; 
what  have  we  to  do  with  thee, 
thou  Jesus  of  Nazareth  ?  art 
thou  come  to  destroy  us  ?  I 
know  thee  who  thou  art ;  the 
Holy  One  of  God. 

25.  And  Jesus  rebuked  him 
saying,  Hold  thy  peace,  and 
come  out  of  him. 

26.  And  when  the  unclean 
spirit  had  torn  him,  and  cried 
with  a  loud  voice,  he  came  out 
of  him. 

27.  And  they  were  all 
amazed,  insomuch  that  they 
questioned  among  themselves, 
saying.  What  is  this  ?  what 
new  doctrine  is  this  ?  for  with 
authority  commandeth  he  even 
the  unclean  spirits,  and  they 
do  obey  him. 

28.  And  immediately  his 
fame  spread  abroad  throughout 
all  the  region  round  about 
Galilee. 


34.  Saying,  Let  us  alone  ; 
what  have  we  to  do  with  thee, 
thou  Jesus  of  Nazareth  ?  art 
thou  come  to  destroy  us  ?  I 
know  thee  who  thou  art ;  the 
Holy  One  of  God. 

35.  And  Jesus  rebuked  him, 
saying,  Hold  thy  peace,  and 
come  out  of  him.  And  when 
the  devil  had  thrown  him  in 
the  midst,  he  came  out  of  him, 
and  hurt  him  not. 

36.  And  they  were  all 
amazed,  and  spake  among 
themselves,  saying.  What  a 
word  is  this!  for  with  autho- 
rity and  power  he  commandeth 
the  unclean  spirits,  and  they 
come  out. 

37.  And  the  fame  of  him 
went  out  into  every  place  of 
the  country  round  about. 


"  The  comparison,"  says  Giles,  who  collates  these  passages, 
"  would  be  far  more  striking,  if  the  extracts  were  given  in  the 
original  Greek.  "^  Bishop  Herbert  Marsh  has  given  the  sub- 
ject a  thorough  examination,  the  results  of  which  fill  a  volume. 
He  says,  "  we  meet  with  several  examples  in  which  all  three 
Gospels  verbally  coincide  :  but  these  examples  are  not  very 
numerous.  The  examples  of  verbal  agreement  between  St 
Matthew  and  St  Mark  are  very  numerous,  and  several  of  them 
are  very  long  and  remarkable.  On  the  other  hand,"  there  is 
not  "  a  single  instance  of  verbal  agreement  between  St  Matthew 


and  St  Mark,"  where  the  order  of  arrangement  differs. 


(( 


In 


no  instance  does  St  Mark  fail  to  agree  verbally  with  St  Matthew, 
where  St  Luke  agrees  verbally  with  St  Matthew.      There  are 

1  Christian  Records,  266. 


frequent  instances  of  verbal  agreement  between  St  Mark  and 
St  Luke  •  though  they  are  neither  so  numerous  nor  so  long, 
as  those  between  St  Matthew  and  St  Mark.     Upon  the  whole, 
the  examples  of  verbal  disagreement  between  St  Mark  and  St 
Luke  are  much  more  numerous  than  the  examples  of  agree- 
ment.      In  several  sections  St  Mark's  text  agrees  m  one  place 
with  that  of  St  Matthew,  in  another  with  that  of  St  Luke. 
St  Matthew  and  St  Luke  invariably  relate  the  same  thmg  m 
different  words,  except  in  the  passages  where  both  agree  at  the 
same  time  with  St  Mark.'"     "  These  phenomena,"  he  observes, 
"  are  inexplicable,"  on  any  other  supposition  than  that  these 
evangelists  "  copied  the  one  from  the  other ;  or  that  all  three 
drew  from  a  common  source.     The  notion  of  an  absolute  mde- 
pendence  in  respect  to  the  composition  of  our  three  first  Gos- 
pels, is  no  longer  tenable."* 

"^  P_What  can  have  been  the  object  in  havmg  the  same  B.^^™^^ 
narratives  told  in  the  same  language  by  different  persons?  Gospels. 
Why,  if  God  designed  to  communicate  an  inspired  history  to 
mankind,  might  not  the  task  have  been  committed  to  one 
selected  person,  according  to  the  method  of  the  Old  Testament, 
as  say  Moses,  Joshua,  Samuel,  Ezra,  and  the  several  prophets? 
'^._This  is  not  apparent.  Ordinarily,  a  combination  of 
evidence  is  a  support  to  a  history. 

p. Then  that  would  be  to  rely  on  a  human  resource,  and 

not  on  divine  authority,  would  it  not  ? 

S. — It  would. 

p._Do  these  evangelists  cite  one  another  by  name  so  as 

to  sustain  each  other  ? 

,S.— They  do  not.  ^  ■    ,     ' 

p._Do  they  agree  with  each  other  throughout  their  tacts 

and  details  ? 

^_They  do  not.  Matthew  and  Mark  are  generally  in 
pretty  close  correspondence.  Luke's  narrative  resembles  their^s 
in  its  framework  and  character,  but  he  often  diifers  m  his 
details.  John's  is  altogether  an  independent  statement,  which 
cannot  be  brought  into  comparison,  or  accord,  with  the  earlier 

^'''p— In  what  respect  does  John's  gospel  stand  out  so  dk-  ^i-i^^ 
tinctly  from  the  others  ?  »«  J"''"- 


1  Dissertation  on  Three  First  Gospels,  150,  151. 


2  Idem,  2,  4. 


42 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


43 


Authorship 
of  John's 
gospel. 


S. — The  first  three  gospels,  as  I  have  pointed  out,  are 
evidently  to  some  extent  based  upon  a  prior  common  record. 
This  feature  does  not  belong  to  John's  gospel.  He,  at  a  later 
day,  and  as  dogmatic  teaching  had  advanced,  has  formed  his 
own  idea  of  the  being  and  character  of  Jesus,  and  he  has  shaped 
his  incidents  and  statements  to  accord  with  his  conception. 
The  Eev.  J.  J.  Tayler  is  one  of  those  who  has  made  a  close 
study  of  this  subject.  He  notices  that  in  the  earlier  gospels 
Jesus  figures  as  one  instructing  by  parables,  arresting  attention 
by  a  constant  succession  of  miracles,  and  seizing  on  passing 
incidents  to  enforce  his  doctrines  ;  while  in  the  fourth  gospel  he 
is  put  forward,  prominently,  as  the  incarnate  word  of  God,  and 
Messiah  of  the  Jews,  prone  to  disputation,  and  disseminating 
his  views  in  formal  sustained  discourses  maintained  in  continuous 
flow.  The  first  three  are,  in  fact,  commonly  distinguished  from 
the  fourth  by  the  term  synoptical,  which  means  that  they  consist 
of  historic  details  forming  together  a  comprehensive  narrative, 
while  the  character  of  the  fourth  is  that  it  is  dogmatic,  or  com- 
posed with  a  view  to  doctrinal  instruction.  Mr  Tayler  also 
adverts  to  the  numerous  points  wherein  the  fourth  gospel  is  at 
issue  with  the  other  three  in  its  statements,  and  says,  "  John's 
is  not  so  much  another,  as  in  one  sense  a  different  gospel.  It 
is  impossible  to  harmonise  the  two  forms  of  the  narrative  :  one 
excludes  the  other.  If  the  three  first  gospels  represent  Christ's 
public  ministry  truly,  the  fourth  cannot  be  accepted  as  simple, 
rehable  history.  If  we  assume  the  truth  of  the  fourth,  we 
must  reject,  on  some  fundamental  points,  the  evidence  of  the 
three  first."^ 

P- — Certainly  the  number  of  the  witnesses  does  not  seem  to 
add  to  the  weight  of  the  evidence.  You  have  shown  that  we  have 
not  Matthew's  gospel,  as  that  was  written  in  Hebrew,  nor 
Mark's,  as  what  he  wrote  was  a  collection  of  unconnected 
anecdotes  and  sayings,  and  that  Luke  got  his  statements  at 
second  hand.  Supposing  the  apostle  John  to  be  the  author 
of  the  fourth  gospel,  would  not  his  testimony,  though  standing 
singly,  be  more  worthy  of  acceptance  than  the  statements 
appearing  in  the  writings  of  the  other  three  who  are  unknown  ? 
What,  then,  is  the  title  of  the  author  of  the  fourth  gospel  to 
be  considered  the  apostle  John? 

1  On  the  Fourth  Gospel,  1-7. 


5__This  gospel  professes  to  have  been  written  by  one  of 
the  apostles.      The  writer  is  described  therein  a^  "  the  disciple 
whom  Jesus  loved,  which  also  leaned  on  his  breast  at  supper; 
and   according  to  tradition,  this  favoured  disciple  was  John. 
But  his  pretension  to  be  the  apostle  does  not  stand  the  test 
of  examination.      Papias  says,   ''  If  I  met  with  any  one  who 
had  been  a  follower  of  the  elders  anywhere,  I  made  it  a  point 
to  inquire  what  were  the  declarations  of  the  elders.      What 
was  said  by  Andrew,  Peter,  or  Philip  ;  what  by  Thomas,  James, 
John,  Matthew,  or  any  other  of  the  disciples   of  our   Lord. 
What  was  said  by  Aristion,  and  by  the  Presbyter  John,  disciples 
of  the  Lord  ;  for  I  do  not  think  that  I  derived  so  much  beneht 
from  books  as  from  the  living  voice  of  those  that  are  still  sur- 
vivincr  '^1     The  books  to  which  Papias  refers  had  declaredly 
less  influence  over  him  than  the  sayings  of  the  apostles  as 
repeated  to  him   by  those  who   said   they  had  heard  them 
Necessarily,  these  writings  could  not  have  been  oracles  accepted 
as  inspired.     Neither,  it  is  presumable,  could  they  have  been 
matured   and  well  arranged  productions,  by  credible  persons, 
demanding  attention,  of  the  form  of  the  gospels  we  now  have 
What  Matthew  and  Mark  wrote,  Papias  has  mentioned,  but 
he  says  nothing  of  any  writing  by  John,  though  John  is  one 
of  those  named  by  him  with  whose  sayings  he  sought  to  become 
acquainted.       He   refers,  it  will  be  observed,  to  two  Johns, 
one  as  "  a  disciple  of  our  Lord,"  and  the  other  as  a  -  presbyter, 
or  elder      We  have  three  sets  of  writings  bearing  the  name  ot 
John,  that  is  the  gospel,  certain  epistles,  and  the  Apocalypse 
The  2d  and  3d  of  the  epistles  profess  to  be  by  an  ''  elder,     but 
their  genuineness  is  much  disputed.      Most  critics  agree  that 
the  other  writings  cannot  be  by  the  same  hand.      ''  Ihe  writer 
of  the  Apocalypse,"  observes  Tayler,   ''  has  a  mind  essentially 
objective.      He  realises  his  conceptions  through  vision.     Me 
transports  himself  into  an  imaginary  world,  and  speaks  as  if 
it  were  constantly  present  to  his  sense.      His  whole  book  is 
pervaded  with  the  glow,  and  breathes  the  vehement  and  fierce 
spirit  of  the    old    Hebrew   prophecy,  painting  vividly  to  the 
mental  eye,  but  never  appealing  directly  to  the  ^F^tual  per- 
ception of  the  soul.      When  we  turn  to  the  fourth  Gospel  we 
find  ourselves  at  once  in  another  atmosphere  of  thought,  fuU 

1  EusebiuB,  Ecc.  Hist.  iii.  39. 


44 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


of  deep  yearnings  after  the  unseen  and  eternal,  ever  soarino- 
into  a  region  which  the  imagery  of  things  visible  cannot  reach*^ 
even  in  its  descriptions   marked   by  a  certain   contemplative 
quietness,  as  if  it  looked  at  things  without  from  the  retired 
depths  of  the  soul  within."^     «  But  little  of  the  genuine  mind 
of  Jesus,"  observes  Strauss,  "  is  to   be  met  with  in  his  book 
(the  Apocalypse).     It  is  written  throughout  in  the  fiery  and 
vengeful  spirit  of  Elijah,   repudiated    by  Jesus  as   foreign  to 
him  ?"      It  might  be  consistently  ascribed  to  him  who  was 
accounted  "  a  son  of  thunder"  (Mark  iii.  17),  and  who  wished 
to  have  fire  called  down  from  heaven  to  avenge  a  mere  inhos- 
pitality  (Luke  ix.  54),  but  clearly  belongs   not  to   the  lovino- 
character  on  which  the  writer  of  the  fourth  gospel  and  the 
epistles  of  John  prided  himself     In  judging  of  correspondence 
ot  style,  Tayler  comes  to  the  conclusion  that  "  there  is  the 
highest  probability  that  the  fourth  Gospel  and  the  first  Epistle 
were  written  by  the  same  hand."»    But  it  is  far  otherwise  when 
the  Apocalypse  enters  into  the  comparison.    "  The  language  of 
the  two  writers,"  he  observes,  "  is  as  different  as  their  charac- 
teristic modes  of  conception  and  thought.      The   style  of  the 
Apocalypse  is  perfectly  barbarous— Hebrew  done  into  Greek 
with  a  constant  violation  of  the  most  ordinary  laws   of  con- 
struction.    The  Greek  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  without  being 
classical,  is  still  fluent,  perspicuous,  and  grammatical  "* 

The  discussion   is    traceable   so  far  back   as  the   time  of 
Dionysius,  in  the  year  260  to  268.      He  says,  "  To  attentive 
observers,  it  will  be  obvious  that  there  is  one  and  the  same 
complexion  and  character  in  the  Gospel  and  Epistle."    Adding 
that  "  we  may  notice  how  the  phraseology  of  the  Gospel  and 
the  Epistle  differs  from  the  Apocalypse.     For  the  former  are 
written   not   only  irreprehensibly,    as   it   regards    the    Greek 
language,  but  are  most  elegant  in  diction   in  the  arguments 
and  the  whole  structure  of  the  style.      It  would  require  much 
to  discover  any  barbarism  or  solecism,  or  any  odd  peculiarity 
of  expression  at  all  in  them."     And  then,  adverting  to  the 
writer  of  the  Apocalypse,  he  says,  "But  I  perceive  that  his 
dialect  and  language  is  not  very  accurate  Greek  ;  but  that  he 
uses  barbarous  idioms,  and  in  some  places  solecisms.""     And 

'.  rt  f""!!^  ^""^'I'  ^'  "*■  '  '"'^  New  Life  of  Jesus,  I.  380 

The  Fourth  Gospel,  54         .  Idem,  11.        ^  Eusebius,  Ec.  Hist.,  vii.  ^. 


^i  i«-i_».l*4*S*i«&eS&fc-^ 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


45 


such  has  been  the  opinion  of  qualified  critics  to  this  day.    The 
gospel  and  the  epistle  may  be  by  the  same  author,  but  the 
gospel  and  the  Apocalypse  cannot  be  so,  unless  the  writer  so 
chano-ed  his  style  and  dialect  as  to  make  it  no  longer  recog- 
nizable,  as  what  he  once  used.      The  Apocalypse  purports  to 
be  the  work  of  John,  and  in  the  absence  of  a  specification  to 
the  contrary,  the  natural  presumption  would  be  that  thereby 
the  apostle  John  was  intended.      Such  certainly  was  the  judg- 
ment of  the  early  Christians.     Justin  Martyr  says,  ''Among  us, 
too  a  certain  man  named  John,  one  of  the  apostles  of  Christ, 
in  k  revelation  made  to  him,  prophesied  that  the  behevers  m 
our  Christ  should  fulfil  a  thousand  years  in  Jerusalem,  and 
that  after  that  there  would  be  the  general  and  final  resurrec- 
tion and  judgment  of  all  men  together,"^—  a  passage  referred 
to  by  Eusebius,  where  he  speaks  of  Justin,  "plainly  calling" 
the  Apocalypse  ''the  work  of  the  apostle."^     Irenseus,  Ter- 
tullian,  and  Origen,  Tayler  informs  us,  held  the  same  view 
therein  representing  "the  strong   unquestioned    tradition    of 
their  own  time,"  Irenseus  and  Origen,  however,  recognising  the 
apostle  a^  equally  the  author  of  the  gospel.^      "  Hardly,"  says 
Tayler,  referring  to  the  Apocalypse,   "one  book  of  the  New 
Testament  has  such  a  list  of  historical  witnesses  marked  by 
name  on  its  behalf."  *     So  far,  then,  from  having  any  solid 
assurance  whereupon  to  accept  the  fourth  gospel  a^  the  work 
of  the  anostle   John,  the   evidence  preponderates   the   other 
way      Tf^  the  apostle  wrote  such  a  gospel,  Papias  should  have 
known  thereof,  and  should  have  spoken  thereof,  when  he  spoke 
of  the  writings  of  Matthew  and  Mark  ;  and  if  the  Apocalypse 
is  to  be  attributed  to  the  apostle,  then,  by  the  laws  of  criticism, 
the  gospel  cannot  also  have  been  his  production. 

What  is  called  the  paschal  controversy  affords  further  ThePa.- 
evidence  against  this  gospel  being  the  production  of  the  troversy. 
apostle  John.  The  question  was  whether  the  easter  festival 
should  be  kept  on  the  day  of  the  Jewish  passover,  that  is,  the 
14th  Nisan,  when,  pursuant  to  the  gospels  of  Matthew,  Mark, 
and  Luke,  Jesus  held  with  his  disciples  the  last  supper,  on  which 
occurrence  the  Christian  ordinance  of  the  eucharist  is  founded, 
or  on  the  succeeding  Sunday  when  he  rose  from  the  dead.     The 


1  Tayler's  Fourth  Gospel,  31. 
»  Tayler's  Fourth  Gospel,  36,  37. 


2Ec.  Hist.,  iv.  18. 
*  Idem,  41. 


46 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


47 


^r 


Asiatic  christians,  including  the  early  Jewish  converts,   con- 
tended for  the  first  position,  and  the  Romish  church  for  the 
second.     Polycarp,  between  A.D.  156  and  168,  visited   Rome, 
and,  on  behalf  of  the  Asiatics,  had  a  friendly  disputation  on  the 
subject   with   Anicetus,   the  bishop  of  Rome,   and   relied,   as 
authorities  on  his  side,  on  the  example  of  "  John,  the  disciple 
of  our  Lord,   and  the   rest  of   the   apostles."     Now,  in  the 
gospel  attributed  to  John,  the  last  supper  is  stated  to  have 
been  held  before  the  passover,  namely,  on  the   13th  Nisan, 
and  it  contains  no  account  of  that  distribution  of  bread  and 
wine   by  Jesus  to  his    disciples,    on    which  the   eucharist  is 
based ;   and  had  this  gospel  been  then  extant,  and  received  as 
the  work  of  the  apostle  John,  it  is  impossible  but  that  the 
bishop  of  Rome  should  have  referred  thereto  as  overthrowing 
the  support  from  John,  depended  upon  by  the  Asiatic  repre*^ 
sentative.      The  incident  is  related  in  a  letter  by  Irenseus,  from 
the  Asiatic  side,  addressed  to  Victor,  the  then  bishop  of  Rome, 
as  preserved  by  Eusebius.     The  gospel  of  John,  in  effect,  is 
considered  to  have  been  got  up  at  a  later  day,  after  the  dis- 
putation between  Polycarp  and  Anicetus,  in  view,  among  other 
matters,  of  sustaining  the   Romish  side  in  this  controversy.^ 
It  is  apparent  from  his  speaking  of  Caiaphas,  as  the  "  high 
priest  that  same  year  "  (xi.  49  ;  xviii.  13),  as  if  the  office  were 
one  filled  annually,  that  the  writer,  whoever  he  may  have  been, 
was  not  one   in  contact  with  Jewish  institutions,  or  familiar 
therewith. 

P.  Are  there  indications  in  the  gospels  themselves  of  their 
^    having  been  written  at  times  removed  from  those  of  the  events 
of  gospels,    recorded  in  them  ? 

S.  There  are  some  such  indications. 

(1.)  According  to  Matthew  xi.  2,  3,  John  the  Baptist,  when 
in  prison,  sends  two  of  his  disciples  to  ascertain  whether  Jesus 
was  the  expected  Messiah.  On  this  Jesus  holds  a  discourse, 
in  which  (v.  1 2)  he  is  made  to  say,  '^  And  from  the  days 
of  John  the  Baptist  until  now  the  kingdom  of  heaven  sufferetb 
violence,  and  the  violent  take  it  by  force."  This  involves  a 
lapse  of  time  from  the  days  of  John,  of  which  Jesus,  who  was 
of  the  same  period,  could  not  have  been  sensible ;  nor  had 
there  been  any  opening  for  the  display  of  a  strenuous  desire  to 

»  Strauss'  New  Life  of  Jesus,  L  97,  98  ;  Tayler  on  4tli  Gospel,  100-104. 


Evidences 
of  late 
authorship 


press  into   the   recently  announced   kingdom,    the   nature   of 
which  was  not  then  understood. 

(2.)  In  John  i.  15-18,  a  testimony  is  attributed  to  John 
the  Baptist  of  Jesus,  which  he  could  not  have  given,  as  it 
embraces  what  was  as  yet  unrealized.  He  says,  "  Of  his  ful- 
ness have  all  tve  received,  and  grace  for  grace ;"  whereas 
Jesus  having  still  to  perform  his  work,  no  such  fulness  could 
have  been  at  that  time  imparted. 

(3.)  "  He  that  taketh  not  his  cross,  and  followeth  after  me, 
is  not  worthy  of  me  "  (Matt.  x.  38).  The  same  symbolical  use 
of  the  word  ''  cross"  appears  also  in  Matt.  xvi.  24  ;  Mark  x.  21 ; 
Luke  ix.  23  ;  xiv.  27.  The  expression  could  not  have  fallen 
from  the  lips  of  Jesus  before  his  own  suffering  on  the  cross 
had  given  it  significance. 

(4.)  The  word  "gospel,"  or  "good  tidings,"  could  not  have 
been  employed  by  Jesus  till,  by  his  expiation  of  sin,  the  happy 
news  of  the  opening  of  the  way  of  salvation  for  sinners  could 
be  announced.  Dr  Giles,  from  whom  I  derive  these  instances, 
says  the  term  was  not  in  use  till  the  end  of  the  second  cen- 
tury.^ 

(5.)  One  of  the  disciples  is  designated  Simon  Peter. 
"  Peter"  is  from  a  Greek  word  signifying  a  stone.  Greek  was 
not  understood  in  Galilee,  the  language  of  the  people  being  a 
corrupt  form  of  the  Chaldee.  The  proper  term  for  them  to 
have  understood  would  have  been  "  Cephas,"  which  is  employed 
but  in  one  passage  in  the  four  gospels  (John  i.  42),  whereas 
"  Petros,"  or  Peter,  appears,  it  has  been  calculated,  in  ninety- 
seven. 

(6.)  The  demoniac  found  in  the  country  of  the  Gadarenes 
is  possessed  by  a  multitude  of  devils,  who  say  their  name  is 
"  Legion"  (Mark  v.  9  ;  Luke  viii.  30).  "  The  four  gospels," 
observes  Giles,  "  are  written  in  Greek,  and  the  word  legion  is 
Latin  ;  but  in  Galilee  and  Pefea,  the  people  spoke  neither 
Latin  nor  Greek,  but  Hebrew,  or  a  dialect  of  it.  The  word 
legion  would  be  perfectly  unintelligible  to  the  disciples  of 
Christ,  and  to  almost  everybody  in  the  country,  as  much  so  as 
the  English  word  '  regiment'  or  '  brigade.*  How  then  can  we 
account  for  the  Latin  word  legion  thus  occurring  in  a  verna- 
cular  dialogue   between   men   of  Galilee  and    Perea  ?     This 

1  Christian  Records,  169-174. 


rgJiHi—miiilllllliPKW 


48 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


4r^ 


Traces  of 
(iepen- 
dence  on 
earlier  re- 
cords. 


question  may  be  answered  thus.  The  compiler  of  the  Evan- 
gelic records  lived  at  a  time  when  the  world  was  wholly  sub- 
dued by  the  Eoman  arms,  and  every  city  and  country  within 
its  wide  boundaries  was  witnessing  the  discipline  and  hauo-hti- 
ness  of  the  Roman  legions.  The  word  legion  was  then  used, 
as  we  use  the  word  host,  to  describe  a  large  indefinite  number, 
and  the  compilers  so  used  it,  not  reflecting  that  in  the  time  of 
Christ  such  usage  was  unknown,  because  the  country  was  not 
then  reduced  into  the  tranquillity  of  a  subject  province."^ 

(7.)  "And  upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my  church"  (Matt, 
xvi.  18).  "And  if  he  shall  neglect  to  hear  them,  tell  it  unto 
the  church"  (Matt,  xviii.  17).  Christian  bodies  could  not 
have  been  thus  designated,  especially  as  referred  to  in  the 
last  of  these  passages,  until  their  growth  and  consolidation 
gave  significancy  to  the  term,  and,  in  fact,  brought  it  into 
existence. 

^- — You  conclude  that  the  close  correspondence  which 
exists  between  the  first  three  evangelists,  running  through 
frequent  and  lengthened  passages,  shows  that  they  must  have 
had  before  them  some  earlier  record  from  which  they  severally 
extracted  materials.  Are  there  any  other  indications  of  the 
same  sort  ? 

^- — There   are.      Their  disagreements,  equally  as   well  as 
their   agreements,  make  it  apparent  that  they  must  have  fol- 
lowed earlier  sources  of  information,  which  in  these  instances 
were  divergent.     There  are,  for  example,  two  accounts  of  the 
annunciation  of  the  divine  origin  of  Jesus,   one  made  by  an 
angel  to   his  mother   before   her  pregnancy,   and    the    other 
through    a   dream   to   her  husband   after   her    condition    had 
become  manifest.      Tliere  are  two  genealogies  of  Jesus  which 
differ  altogether  from  each  other,  one  being  in  the  regal  line 
of  Solomon,  and  the  other  in  the  unregal  line  of  his  brother 
Nathan;  and  that  given   by  Luke  is  thrust  in  out  of  place 
after  we  hear  of  Jesus  arriving  at  maturity.      One  narrative 
ha.s   the  flight  of  the  family,  after  the  birth  of  Jesus,  from 
Jerusalem  to  Egypt,  and  thence  the  journey  to  Galilee,  while 
another  excludes  such  flight,  keeping  them  in  Judea  till  they 
went   finally  to   Galilee.      There  are  accounts  of  Jesus  being 
tempted  by  the  devil  in  the  wilderness  of  Judea,  at  a  time 

»  Christian  Records,  197. 


when,  according  to  another  account,  he  was  performing  a  miracle 
in  Cana  of  Galilee.      There  are  two  accounts  of  the  miraculous 
feeding  of  multitudes,  which  evidently  relate  to  one  and  the 
same  incident,  given   merely  with  variation  as   to  numbers. 
During  the  last  six  months  of  his  life,  Jesus,  according  to  one 
set  of  representations,  was  ministering  in  Galilee,  but  according 
to  another  statement  he  was   at   this   same  time   in  Judea. 
Pursuant  to   one  account  he  made  his  way  from  Galilee  to 
Jerusalem  through  Samaria,  that  is  by  a  line  west  of  the  Jor- 
dan; pursuant  to  another,  he  crossed  the  Jordan  and  prosecuted 
his  journey  through  the  regions  east  of  that  river.     There  are 
double  accounts  of  his  purification  of  the  temple,  and  of  his 
undergoing  anointment  at  a  feast,  one  statement  placing  these 
events  early  in  his  public  career,  the  other  at  the  close  thereof. 
The  duration  of  his  ministry  is  by  one  evangelist  shown  to 
have  occupied  more  than  two  years,  and  to  have  embraced 
several  journeys  from  Galilee  to  Judea,  and  by  the  others  but 
a  portion  of  a  year,  with  but  one  such  journey.     There   are 
conflicting    descriptions    of    the    circumstances    under    which 
Matthew,  Peter  and  Andrew,  and  James  and  John,  were  called 
to  the  apostleship,  and  under  which  Judas  betrayed  his  Lord 
and  came  by  his  retributive  end.     There  are  representations 
of  various  appearances  of  Jesus  after  his  death,  the  particulars 
of  which    are   so  discordant  that  each  one  account  is  made 
impossible  by  some  other  account.      And  the  time  occupied 
with  such  manifestations  is  by  two  evangelists  limited  to  a  single 
day,  while  the  others  extend  it  to  several,  and  one  historian  to  as 
many  as  forty  days.     Variations  so  numerous,  and  of  so  marked 
a  nature,  could  not  have  occurred  had  the  writers  been  draw- 
ing from  personal  sources  of  information.      They  must  have 
trusted  to  prior  and  independent  narratives,  of  which  Luke 
shows  there  were  already   "many"  before  he  put  his  history 
together,  or  else  have  followed  floating  traditions,  or  even  the 
promptings  of  their  own  imaginations  in  search  of  what  might 
have  the  most  telling  effect. 

Strauss'  judgment  on  this  subject  is  thus  expressed: — 
"  Their  narratives  (those  of  the  four  evangelists)  throughout 
were  to  be  considered  not'  the  accounts  of  eye-witnesses,  but 
only  fragmentary  notes  recoitied  by  men  who  lived  at  a  dis- 
tance fr°om  the  events,  and  who,  though  they  penned  down 

D 


ill 


50 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT - 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


51 


Book  of 
Enoch. 


many  authentic  notices  and  speeches,  collected  also  all  sorts  of 
legendary  traditions,  and  embellished  them  in  part  by  inven- 
tions of  their  own.  As  regards  the  Gospel  of  John  the  con- 
clusion of  modern  criticism  is  to  the  effect  that  the  famous 
enrichment  which  it  brings  to  the  evangelical  history  is  only 
apparent  and  not  real,  that  all  that  it  contains  of  a  really 
historical  character  is  taken  from  the  older  gospels,  and  that 
all  that  goes  beyond  this  is  either  pure  invention  or  modifi- 
cation."^ 

It  is  furthermore  clear  that  the  Book  of  Enoch,  a  work  be- 
lieved to  have  been  put  forth  about  fifty  years  before  Christ,  has 
been  freely  used  by  several  of  the  writers  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment.     Jude  openly  cites  this  production,  mistaking  it  as  that 
of  the  genuine  Enoch  himself.      He  says  (14,  1 5),  "  and  Enoch 
also,  the  seventh  from    Adam,    prophesied   of  these,    saying, 
Behold,  the  Lord  cometh  with  ten  thousand  of  his  saints,  to 
execute  judgment  upon    all,    and   to    convince   all    that    are 
ungodly  among  them  of  all  their  ungodly  deeds  which  they 
have  uDgodly  committed,  and  of  all  their  hard  speeches  which 
ungodly  sinners  have  spoken  against  him."      The  passage  in 
the  Book  of  Enoch  stands  thus.      "  Behold,  he  comes  with  ten 
thousands  of  his  saints  to  execute  judgment  upon  them,  and 
destroy  the  wicked,  and  reprove  all  the  carnal  for  everything 
which  the  sinful  and  ungodly  have  done  and  committed  against 
him."      Bishop  Colenso  has  compared  a  good  many  passages  of 
the  New  Testament  with  this  Book  of  Enoch,   demonstrating 
that  the  one  have  been  taken  from  the  other.      The  following 
are  samples: — 

Enoch  ix.  3 — "  Thou  hast  made  all  things,  and  all  things 
are  open  and  manifest  before  thee."  Heb.  iv.  13 — ''Neither 
is  there  any  creature  that  is  not  manifest  in  his  sight :  but  all 
things  are  naked  and  open  unto  the  eyes  of  him  with  whom 
we  have  to  do." 

Enoch  xii.  5 — Angels  are  described  who  "  have  deserted  the 
lofty  sky,  and  their  holy  everlasting  station,  who  have  been 
polluted  with  women,  and  have  done  as  the  sons  of  men  do, 
by  taking  to  themselves  wives,  and  who  have  been  greatly 
corrupted  on  the  earth."  And  the  sentence  on  these  is  (x. 
15,  16),  "Bind  them  for  seventy  generations  underneath  the 

1  New  Life  of  Jesus,  I.  125,  187. 


earth,  even  to  the  day  of  judgment  and  of  consummation,  until 
the  judgment,  which  will  last  for  ever,  be  completed.  Then 
shall  they  be  taken  away  into  the  lowest  depths  of  the  fire  in 
torments,  and  in  confinement  shall  they  be  shut  up  for  ever." 

Jude  6,  7 "  And  the  angels  which  kept  not  their  first  estate, 

but  left  their  own  habitation,  he  hath  reserved  in  everlasting 
chains  under  darkness  unto  the  judgment  of  the  great  day. 
Even  as  Sodom  and  Gomorrha,  and  the  cities  about  them  in 
like  manner,  giving  themselves  over  to  fornication,  and  gomg 
after  strange  flesh,  are  set  forth  for  an  example,  suffering  the 
vengeance  of  eternal  fire."  2  Pet.  ii.  4—"  God  spared  not 
the  angels  that  sinned  but  cast  them  down  to  hell,  and 
delivered  them   into  chains  of  darkness,  to  be  reserved  unto 

judgment." 

Enoch  xxxviii.  2 — ''  It  would  have  been  better  for  them 
if  they  had  never  been  born."  Matt.  xxvi.  24—"  It  had  been 
good  for  that  man,  if  he  had  not  been  born." 

Enoch  xlv.  3—"  In  that  day  shall  the  Elect  One  sit  upon 
a  throne  of  glory,  and  shall  choose  their  conditions  and  count- 
less habitations."  Matt.  xxv.  31— ''When  the  Son  of  Man 
shall  come  in  his  glory,  and  all  the  holy  angels  with  him,  then 
shall  he  sit  upon  the  throne  of  his  glory."  John  xiv.  2 — "  In 
my  Father's  house  are  many  mansions ;  if  it  were  not  so,  I 
would  have  told  you.      I  go  to  prepare  a  place  for  you." 

Enoch  xlv.  5 — "I  will  change  the  face  of  the  heaven:  I 
will  bless  it  and  illuminate  it  for  ever.  I  will  also  change 
the  face  of  the  earth :  I  will  bless  it  and  cause  those  whom  I 
have  elected  to  dwell  upon  it."  2  Pet.  iii.  13— "  Neverthe- 
less, we,  according  to  his  promise,  look  for  new  heavens  and 
a  new  earth,  wherein  dwelleth  righteousness." 

Enoch  1.  2 "  The  day  of  their  salvation  has  approached." 

Luke  xxi.  28  —  "Your  redemption  draweth  nigh."  Rom. 
xiii.  11 ''Now  is  our  salvation  nearer  than  when  we  be- 
lieved." 

Enoch  1.  4 "  And  all  the  righteous  shall  become  angels  m 

heaven."     Mark  xii.  25—"  They  are  as  the  angels  which  are 

in  heaven."  .      „ 

Enoch  1.  4 "  Their  countenance  shall  be  bright  with  joy. 

Matt.  xiii.  43— "Then  shall  the  righteous  shine  forth  as  the 
sun  in  the  kingdom  of  their  Father." 


62 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


Enoch  liii.  1-6 — "  I  beheld  a  deep  valley  burning  with  fire, 
and  there  my  eyes  beheld  the  instruments  which  they  were 
making,  fetters  of  iron  without  weight.  Then  I  enquired  of 
the  angel  of  peace,  who  proceeded  with  me,  saying,  For  whom 
are  these  fetters  and  instruments  prepared?  He  replied, 
These  are  prepared  for  the  host  of  Azazeel,  that  they  may  be 
delivered  over  and  adjudged  to  the  lowest  condemnation,  and 
that  their  angels  may  be  overwhelmed  with  hurled  stones,  as 
the  Lord  of  spirits  has  commanded.  Michael  and  Gabriel, 
Raphael  and  Phanuel,  shall  be  strengthened  in  that  day,  and 
shall  then  cast  them  into  a  furnace  of  blazing  fire,  that  the 
Lord  of  Spirits  may  be  avenged  of  them  for  their  crimes ;  be- 
cause they  became  ministers  of  Satan,  and  seduced  those  who 
dwell  upon  earth."  Matt.  xiii.  41,  42 — "The  Son  of  man 
shall  send  forth  his  angels,  and  they  shall  gather  out  of  his 
kingdom  all  things  that  offend,  and  them  which  do  iniquity ; 
and  shall  cast  them  into  a  furnace  of  fire."  Matt.  xxv.  40,  41 
— "And  the  King  shall  say.  Depart  from  me,  ye  cursed,  into 
everlasting  fire,  prepared  for  the  devil  and  his  angels. 

Enoch  Ixi.  4 — "  The  word  of  his  mouth  shall  destroy  all  the 
sinners  and  all  the  ungodly,  who  shall  perish  at  his  presence." 
2  Thess.  i.  9 — "  Who  shall  be  punished  with  everlasting  de- 
struction from  the  presence  of  the  Lord,  and  from  the  glory  of 
bis  power."  2  Thess.  ii.  8 — "  That  wicked,  whom  the  Lord 
shall  consume  with  the  spirit  of  his  mouth,  and  shall  destroy 
with  the  brightness  of  his  coming." 

Enoch  Ixi.  8 — "  Trouble  shall  come  upon  them,  as  upon  a 
woman  in  travail."  1  Thess.  v.  3 — "  Then  sudden  destruction 
Cometh  upon  them,  as  travail  upon  a  woman  witb  child." 

Enoch  Ixi.  9 — "And  trouble  shall  seize  them,  when  they 
shall  behold  this  son  of  woman  sitting  upon  the  throne  of  his 
glory."  Matt.  xix.  28 — "In  the  regeneration,  when  the  Son 
of  man  shall  sit  in  the  throne  of  his  glory."  Matt.  xxv.  31  — 
"  When  the  Son  of  man  shall  come  in  his  glory,  then  shall  he 
sit  upon  the  throne  of  his  glory." 

Enoch  Ixxxii.  4,  5 — "  I  saw  in  a  vision  heaven  purifying, 
and  snatched  away ;  and,  falling  to  the  earth,  I  saw  likewise 
the  earth  absorbed  by  a  great  abyss."  Enoch  xcii.  1 7 — "  The 
former  heaven  shall  depart  and  pass  away,  a  new  heaven  shall 
appear."     Heb.  ix.  23 — "It  was  therefore  necessary  that  the 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


53 


patterns  of  things  in  the  heavens  should  be  purified  with  these; 
but  the  heavenly  things  themselves  with  better  sacrifices  than 
these"  Matt.  v.  18— "Till  heaven  and  earth  pa^s  away,  one 
iot  or  one  title  shall  in  no  wise  pass  from  the  law,  till  all  be 
fulfilled"  In  Matt.  xxiv.  35  ;  Mark  xiii.  31  ;  Luke  xvi.  17  ; 
xxi  33  the  like  anticipation  of  the  passing  away  of  heaven 
and  earth  appears.  2  Pet.  iii.  10,  1 3-"  The  day  of  the  Lord 
will  come ;  in  the  which  the  heavens  shall  pass  away  the 
earth  also  and  the  works  that  are  therein  shall  be  burned  up. 
Nevertheless  we,  according  to  his  promise,  look  for  new 
heavens  and  a  new  earth,  wherein  dwelleth  righteousness 

Enoch   xciii.   6— xciv.   6- "Woe  to  those  who   build   up 
iniquity  and  oppression.      Woe  to  those  who  build  up  their 
houses  with  crime !     Woe  to  you  who  are  rich  I  for  in  your 
riches  have  ye  trusted,  but  from  your  riches  you  shall  be  re- 
moved     You  are  destined  to  the  day  of  darkness,  and  to  the 
day  of  the  great  judgment.     Woe  to  you  who  recompense  your 
neighbour  with  evil !  for  you  shall  be  recompensed  according 
to   your  works.      Woe   to   you,   ye   false   witnesses    you  who 
aggravate   iniquity !   for    you   shall   suddenly  perish.       Matt 
xxlii   23— "Woe  unto  you— hypocrites !  for  ye  pay  tithe  of 
mint  and  anise  and  cummin,  and  have  omitted  the  weightier 
matters  of  the  law,  judgment,  mercy,  and  faith         (Also  Luke 
xi  42)      Matt,  xxiii.  14— "Woe  unto  you— hypocrites  I   for 
ye  devour  widow's  houses."     Luke  vi.  24-"  Woe  unto   you 
that  are  rich  1  for  ye  have  received  your  consolation        James 
V  1    3_-  Go  to  now,  ye  rich  men,  weep  and  howl  for  your 
miseries  that  shall  come  upon  you.     Ye  have  heaped  treasure 
together  for  the  last  days."      2  Pet.  ii.  4,  l7-''Resjrved  unto 
judgment.     To  whom  the  mist  of  darkness  is  reserved  for  ever 
Rom   xii.  17— "  Recompense  to  no  man  evil  for  evil       Matt, 
xvi    27—"  Then  he  shall  reward  every  man  according  to  his 
works."      (Also  Rom.  ii.  6  ;    2  Tim.  iv.  14.)      Matt.  v.  11— 
Blessed  are  ye,  when  men  .  .  .  shall  say  ^^1. -^^^  ^^J^ 
against  you  falsely,  for  my  sake."     Matt,  xviii.  7-    Woe  ^ 
that    man    by    whom    the    offence    cometh  1"       (Also    Luke 

'"'^Tht^esemblances  above  traced  out  affect  passages  in  the 
four  Gospels,  those  in  Matthew  being  numerous  ;  m  five  ol  the 
Epistles  attributed  to  Paul,  namely,  in  Romans,  1st  and  2d 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


55 


54 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


Thessalonians,  2d  Timothy,  and  Hebrews  ;  in  the   2d  Epistle 
of  Peter  ;  and  the  Epistles  of  James  and  Jude.      The  corre- 
spondence of  Enoch  with  the  Apocalypse  is  so  remarkable  as  to 
warrant  the  conclusion  that  the  one  revelation  has  been  framed 
upon  the  model  of  the  other.     We   find  in  Enoch,  with  more 
or  less  identity  of  idea  and  language,  the  praises  and  invocation 
of  God  appearing  in  Rev.  iv.  11 ;   xv.  3  ;   xvii.  14  ;  xix.  16  ; 
the  binding  of  Satan  and  the  casting  him  into  the  lake  of  fire 
in  Rev.  xx.  2,  10  ;  the  throne  in  heaven,  and  the  personage 
sitting  on  it,  with  the  voice  or  utterance  of  the  cherubim,  and 
the  ten  thousand  times  ten  thousand  around  him,  serving  him 
day  and  night,  in  Rev.  iv.  2,  8;  v.  11;  vii.  15;   the  tree  of 
life,  and  the  elect  partaking  of  its  fruit,  having  length  of  life 
added  to  them,  with  absence  of  sorrow  and  pain,  in  Rev.  ii.  7 ; 
xxi.  4;  xxii.  2,  14;  the  great  multitude  of  the  saved  before  the 
throne,  in  Rev.  vii.  9;   the  new  heaven  and  earth  with  the 
passing  away  of  the  old,  in  Rev.  xxi.  1 ;   the  one  whose  head  is 
white  \ke  wool,   in   Rev.  i.  14;    the   blood  of   the   righteous 
ascending  to  the  presence  of  the  Lord,  with  the  promise  of 
judgment,  when  his  patience  should  cease  to  endure,  in  Rev. 
vi.  9,  10  ;  the  judge  seated  on  his  throne,  the  opening  of  the 
book  of  life,  the  dead,  including  those  lying  in  destruction  and 
hell,   given  up  for  judgment,  in  Rev.  xx.  11-13  ;  the  joy  of 
saints,  when  at  their  supplication  the  blood  of  the  righteous  is 
remembered   by  the  Lord,  in  Rev.  xviii.  20;    xix.  1,  2;    the 
fountain  of  righteousness  where  those  athirst  are  satisfied,  in 
Rev.  vii.  17;  xxi.  6;  xxii.  1;  xxii.  17;  the  lake  of^fire,  and 
the  binding  of  evil  spirits  in  chains,  because  of  their  deception 
of  mankind,  in  Rev.  xix.  20  ;  xx.  1-3,  10  ;  the  beast  rising 
out  of  the  sea,  and  the  other  beast  coming  out  of  the  earth,  in 
Rev.  xiii.    1,   11  ;    the    seven    spirits    before    the    throne    in 
Rev.  i.  4  ;  iii.  1  ;  iv.  5  ;  v.  6  ;   the  praise  of  every  power  in 
heaven,  in  Rev.  v.  13;  the  destruction  from  (the  sword  of)  his 
mouth,  in  Rev.  i.  16  ;    ii.  16  ;    xix.  15,  21;    the  everlasting 
dwelling  of  the  saints  with  the  Son  of  man,  in  Rev.  vii.  1 5  ; 
xxi.  3 ;  the  fear  and  debasement  of  the  kings  and  rulers  of  the 
earth,  in  Rev.  vi.  15  ;  xix.  18  ;  the  seraphic  beings  who  watch 
round  the  throne  day  and  night,  in  Rev.  iv.  8 ;   the  falling  (as 
dead)  before  the  Lord,  and  being  raised  up  again,  in  Rev.  i.  17 ; 
and   the   star  falling  from    heaven,    in   Rev.  viii.  10;    ix.  1. 


"  These  ■'  says  Bishop  Colenso,  speaking  of  all  the  collected 
exT'aci  ''Iro  only  a'few  instances  of  the  f^^^;^^^^ 
remarkable  book  seems  to  have  exercised  upon  the  minds  of 
rlpvout  men  in  the  first  age  of  Christianity.  ,..,,, 

P  By  whom  was  the  book  of  Acts  written,  and  is  it  to  be  BooUof 

""f  ?he  iTot  Acts  purports  to  be  the  work  of  one  who 
bad  wduen  a  "  former  trLtise."  addressed  to  one  Theoplu  u. 
This  points  to  the  writer  of  the  gospel  according  to  Luke  as 
I  «Tor  Z  his  work  is  inscribed  to  Theophilus.  In  wr.tmg 
the  author,  as  nis  worK  materials 

tliP    frospel    the  author   showed   that    he    urew   in» 
from  0  diary  sources,  and,  therefore,  not   from   mspiration 
InTin   he  Acts  he  does  not  allege  that  he  ha.  been  iiispired. 
The  book  consists  of  incidents   of  contemporaneous   histo  y, 
Ind  therefore  does  not  present  itself  in  the  character  of  an  in- 

'Pp' Wefe'the  Epistles  inspired  ?  And  are  they  authenticated  ^^, 

-  rihTr  mti;  T^IL^  of  occasional  epistl. 
Jr2l\o  partici/ar  congregations,  or  even  -  -du^,  . 

^Z^^^^  rrdlrel^Jr  a^a 
particular  silou  r  ,     human  correspondence, 

be  viewed  as  divine,  and  not  mere  y  ^^^  ^^^ 

is  of  course  questionable.    The  Epistle  to  tn 
three  ascribed  to  John,  are  anonymous.     The  othe^  all  a 

hand      "  Ye  see,"  he  says  to  the  Galatians,       how       „ 

leuer  I  have  written  unto  you  ^^^^^  ^t^t  '  salutation 
2d  Epistle  to  the  Thessalonians  he  says  *  ^^^  ^^^ 

:^::Z:^^':^'^:^^^  .ie  b^een  .openy 

^^Hatthe  actual  epistles  been  preserved  1 

1  Pentateuch  and  Joshua,  IV.  309-323. 


^ 


I# 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


57 


56 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


S.  They  have  not.     We  have  only  what  purport  to  be  copies 

of  them.  /.  1      • 

P.  Do  any  of  the  early  Christian  writers  speak  of  having 

seen  the  actual  authenticated  epistles  ? 

S.  They  make  no  such  statement. 

P.  Can  you  account  for  the  authenticated  epistles  not 
having  been  preserved,  consistently  with  the  importance  at- 
tached by  Paul  to  the  fact  of  their  authentication  ? 

S    I  cannot. 

P.  If  these  epistles  were  really  inspired  by  God,  why  should 
Paul  have  been  so  particular  as  to  the  circumstance  that  they 
bore  his  signature  ?  He  was  a  mere  man,  was  he  not,  who 
had  to  be  himself  addressed  by  God  equally  as  the  others  ? 

S.  It  is  impossible  to  explain  this.  It  looks,  certainly,  as  if 
what  God  wrote  was  considered  to  require  a  humaa  voucher  to 

give  it  currency. 

P.  And  after  all,  those  vouchers  were  lost  1 
S.   So  it  appears. 
Collection         P-  Is  the  collection  of  the  epistles,  of  the  stamp  of  these 
of  Epistles    which  were  to  be  preserved  as  God's  communications  to  man, 
pTet^"        complete  ?  And  who  was  charged  with  making  the  collection  ? 
S.  The  letters  would  certainly  have  to  be  sought  out  from 
among  the   different   communities   to  whom  they   had  been 
addressed,  but  there  is  no  trace  of  any  one  having  been  charged 
with  such  an  office,  nor  can  it  be  said  how  the  collection  was 
made.      Several  of  the  letters  have  undoubtedly  been  omitted, 
apparently  from  defect  of  collection.      For  example,  there  is 
one  recited,  and  it  may  be  copied  in  full,  in  Acts  xv.  22-31, 
which  is  not  in  the  collection  of  the  so  called   sacred  epistles, 
and  this  distinctly  purports  to  have  been  inspired.     Then  there 
is  a  letter  referred  to   by  Paul  in  1  Cor.  v.  9,  as  previously 
written  by  him,  which  is  wanting.      There  is  another  he  speaks 
of  in  2  Cor.  ii.  3-11  and  vii.  8-12  which  is  also  wanting.    And 
in  Col.  iv.  1 6,  he  mentions  a  letter  of  his  to  the  Laodiceans,  which 
was  to  be  read  publicly  in  the  church,  and  which  is  not  extant. 
P.  In  what  way  is  the  letter  recited  in  Acts  xv.   shown  to 
have  been  inspired  ? 

S.  It  is  so  declared.  The  letter  conveyed  certain  injunc- 
tions, which  were  said  to  have  been  adopted  as  "it  seemed  good 
to  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  to  us"  (the  writers). 


4 


the  men  who  sent  the  letter  ? 

S.  One  would  think  not.  „,r>norted  bv  divine  inspiration 

P.  Do  any  of  Paul's  epistles  profess  to  be  supported   y  ^^^^^ 

authority?  except  in  certain  passages  where 

S.  Apparently  all  o   ^^"''/^f  ^\.^^  ,^  tis  own  judgment, 

he  says,  discrimmatively,  that  he  ^^^^^J  ^  f^^^a  in  1 

rather  than  on  divine  command.     These  ar  ^^  ^^^ 

Cor.  vii.  6,  10    12,  25  ^l^^^^^Zt  o^cll^^nirnent-,''   and 
he  speaks  "by  permission  and  not  o  ^^^  ^^^  ^^^_„ 

then  of  one  command  say.,      not  i^  _         ^    „     ^^  ^ 
and  of  another,  that  he  .f--  ';;t  jlment  of  the  Lord, 

rfr'it^.T:.T^T:i::s;oi  bretU 

Lord  Jesus     {\  iness.  i^-      -"     „,-....  «-^;Ve  command  and 
in  the  name  of  our  Lord  Jesus  ChnJ_,  ...    ^^  ^^^  . 

exhort  you  by  our  Ix>rd  Jesus  C^-t     ^^        ^^  ^  ^^^ 

« If  any  man  think  himself  to  be  a  prop      ,         ^      ^^^  ^^^ 
him  acknowledge  that  the  tW  ^^-^  I.^^J^^;'^     ^ 
commandments  of  the  Lora      ^  ^  instance 

t,.  .hougte  .h.t  OoO  n,»t    -  ,^7~!:;i„d  though. . 
ho,  »«  he  »  too.  »  ™P'7  3,  ,„  „„.  ,l„s.  abl.  10 

s.  I  »..oi  ton  ?■>»  ,  f »'J'™  ,b»,„,o  c.rt.i.ty.    0. 

(1  Cor.  vii.  40).  ovktpnce  some  half  hun-  Formation 

'■    p.  The,.  .P,««  to  have  ten  »  «*  J  ,,       .,.„^  — 

ted  go.p,l  -'""'rj, 2"1'°:^  ";  have  Ihoughl  t"^'  ^ 

™ri^ititr;"drsooa,.a*oh 

were  of  mere  human  authorship  ? 


58 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


59 


S.  There  were  no  means  of  an  assured  and  certain  nature 
for  exercising  such  discrimination.  The  acts  of  inspiration  had 
not  left  a  trace  of  the  operation  behind  them.  The  inspired 
men  were  no  longer  in  being.  There  was  nothing  known,  of  a 
positive  sort,  whereby  to  connect  the  Gospels,  the  book  of  Acts, 
or  the  Apocalypse,  with  any  imputed  writer.  The  authen- 
ticity of  the  Epistles  might  possibly  be  maintained  upon  tra- 
ditionary evidence,  but  they  threw  no  light  on  that  of  the 
other  books,  which  are  not  even  cited  in  them.  The  selection, 
therefore,  could  only  be  a  matter  of  pure  discretion,  and  to  be 
ratified  by  consent,  and  who  even  made  it,  primarily,  is  unknown. 

P.  What  was  the  use  of  having  an  unerring  word  from  God, 
when  the  very  determination,  which  is  that  word,  was  left  so 
absolutely  to  erring  man  ? 

S.   I  cannot  answer  you. 

P.  When  was  the  selection  completed  ? 

S.  The  process  has  been  traced  by  Reuss  from  period  to 
period.  He  shows  that  no  acknowledged  list  or  canon  of  the 
New  Testament  writings  had  been  agreed  upon  up  to  A.D.  130; 
that  up  to  A.D.  180,  about  which  time  Marcion  endeavoured  to 
make  out  such  a  list,  there  was  none,  and  that  none,  in  fact, 
existed  up  to  the  fourth  century.  He  describes  the  efforts  of 
Eusebius,  in  A.D.  320,  to  supply  this  need,  and  which  ended  in 
uncertainty  ;  and  then  notices  the  canons  made  in  363  by  the 
Council  of  Laodicea,  and  in  397  by  the  Synod  of  Carthage,  but 
observes  that  these  were  but  provincial  councils,  and  in  con- 
flict. Finally,  he  shows  that  the  question  of  the  canon  was 
still  an  open  one  in  1545,  when,  after  much  discussion,  the 
Council  of  Trent  pronounced  upon  it.^ 

Scriptures         ^-  What  havo  been  the  prominent  subjects  of  disagreement 
that  are       jj^  makincf  up  the  canon  ? 

called  m  . 

question.  S.  I  havc  mentioned  that  the  earliest  version  of  the  Old 

Testament,  namely,  the  Greek  translation,  called  the  Septua- 
gint,  contains  fourteen  books,  which  the  Protestants  reject  as 
apocryphal  or  spurious.  These  books  were  commonly  accepted 
in  the  earlier  times  of  Christianity.  Jerome  and  the  Eastern 
Church  disallowed  them,^  but  they  were  recognised,  partially  or 
wholly,  by,  among  others,  Origen,  Cyprian,  Augustine,  Athana- 

1  Histoire  du  Canon,  29,  59,  77,  155,  157,  192,  218,  220,  221,  228,  293. 
«  Idem,  207,  221. 


•       ..d  the  Latin  Church,  and  were  formally  adopted  by  the 
sius,  and  the  JLatm  ^nur  ^  ^^ 

Councils  of  Florence  m  A.D.    14^^^,  ana  o  .    • 

In ter  1  I  have  also  specified  various  apocrypha  of  the  Christian 
pt  which  were  viewed  as  inspired  by  prominent  members  of 
era  which  were  vie  r  Testament,  which 

the  early  church.      The   books  oi  in  Hebrews, 

have  been  called  in  question,  are  the  Epistle  to  tne  xi  , 

the  Epistle  of  James,  the  2d  of  Peter,  the  ^J  -^  3^^^^^ 
the  Epistle  of  Jude,  and  the  Apocalypse.      The  ^P-^^^^^^^^^ 
Hebrews  was  ascribed  by  Tertullian  to  Barnabas      Clem^^^^^^^^ 

1  •    xu       1.+  +ViQ+  Pfliil  mav  have  written  it  m  neorew, 
Alexandria  thought  that  Paul  may  n  ^^^^ 

inrl  T.uke  have  translated  it  into  ureeK.     v^wj,     , 

down  from  Pauls  preaehin  ^^^^  j,^.^^^^ 

author  reaUy  was.     Ihe  La  m  Ch      ^J^^^^.^^^^^  ^^^^^.^jy 
Jerome  held  it  m  qoudi,  bci^iiio  ^^^  i  t_-       if  ,r;oworl  it 

lo  Barnabas.  Luke,  or  Clement  of  ^^J.-^^X     JI/^^^^ 
as  a  translation  by  an  unknown  hand.       To  the  ^nd  ° 
second  century  the  Epistle  of  James  was  ^^^I^-^J^^Xal 
It  was  questioned  by  Origen     not  -te-  ^^^^^    Ap^to'^ 

r  ?::rhi^  ttTflsp"/  Sres  ;  L  'shown  by 
?^rto\e"ouUful  Lthenticity.3  Jerome  alsoj^^^^ 
,1,,.  the  2d  of  Peter  w«.  oJled  m  que.tion.  riiis  md  W 
iTlf  John  ««.  -  know,  o,  u.  the  »d  ,f  .  e  se^d  c»- 
*      r      -Rnth  these  Epistles,  as  also  the  2d  ot  John,  were  n^ 

l,,b!^b,  0  i<.e7;    ,.e  e  „l  included  in  the  Apcfl.c.^ 
lSl«r,  °,e°e    *e.ed  .,  C,p™  i^^^;™  -"t 

to  the  end  of  the  second  century  ;  it  was  rejected  by  Ongen 

SbrCurdS:^'S"^^-"'^=- 

IS  placed  in  f'^^^  e     ^Ue  prominent  Reformers  were  not 

1  ^r^'retttrthese  disp'uted  Scriptures,  thoiigh  they 
were  finally  admitted  into  the  Protestant  canon.     Zwingle 

>  Reuss.  ,37.  f  .If  •  f '  ^',^io''''  ''''  ''llem.  123,  143.  151.  160.  208. 
.  Idem,  38  120  141  l^l,  207^210^      ^        ^^3, 143,  160.  208. 
'  Idem,  123,  142.  151,  153,  160,  .:w- 
•  Idem,  39,  160,  192. 


60 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


Origin  of 
Canon. 


•Transmis- 
sion of 
Text. 


jected  the  Apocalypse.  Calvin,  on  critical  grounds,  disallowed 
the  authorship  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  the  Epistle  of 
James,  and  the  2d  of  Peter.  And  Luther  raised  objections  to 
the  Hebrews,  James,  Jude,  and  the  Apocalypse.^ 

P.  When,  from  the  beginning,  there  was  so  little  to  guide 
the  judgment  in  determining  which  of  the  current  writings 
should  be  selected  to  form  the  volume  of  the  New  Testament, 
why  was  such  a  task  undertaken  at  all  ? 

S,  At  the  outset  of  Christianity  the  need  of  a  written  record, 
as  a  vehicle  for  its  doctrines,  was  not  felt,  and  it  is  apparent 
that  none  was  contemplated.      The  message  was  a  short  one, 
namely,  to  repent  and  be  baptized  as  the  end  of  all  things  was 
at  hand,  and  it  was  delivered   by  Jesus  and  his  earliest  fol- 
lowers by  verbal  exhortation.      Gradually  a  development  and 
expansion  of  doctrine  ensued,  and  the  mission  of  the  founder 
became  magnified.      The  gospel  narratives  were  then  framed, 
and    epistles   were  addressed   to   the   different   congregations. 
Then  followed  questionings,  divergencies  ot  opinion,  and  open 
conflict.      Heresies,  as  they  were  called,  sprang  up.     To  meet 
these,  authoritative  records,  to  which  to  appeal,  were  seen  to 
be  desirable.      The  most  approved  of  the  gospel  narratives  were 
then  put  together.      It  was  no  longer  a  toleration   of  an  un- 
limited number  of  such  narratives,  as  when  the  ''  many"  such 
prevailed  without  objection  in  the  time  of  the  writer  of  the 
gospel    according  to   Luke.       The   selection  was   made,    and 
the  number  restricted  to  the  four  now  accepted  gospels.     And 
the  scattered  epistles,  some  in  one  place,  some  in  another,  were 
sought  out,  got  together,  and  the  best  judgment  that  could  be 
was  formed  upon  the  collection.      It  is  not,  as  Reuss  observes, 
as  an  inheritance  from  the  apostles  that  the  New  Testament 
scriptures  have  been  transmitted  to  us :  they  have  been  the 
growth  of  circumstances,  the  fruits  of  local  custom,  of  tradition, 
and  of  practical  necessity.      The  work  might  have  been  accom- 
plished   more    satisfactorily  had   it   been    earlier  undertaken. 
The  lapse  of  a  hundred  years  jeopardized  its  accomplishment, 
and  let  in  a  flood  of  weaknesses  and  incertitude.^ 

P'  What  have  been  the  channels  for  the  transmission  of 
these  records  from  the  early  times  to  the  present  ?  Is  it  sure 
that  the  transcripts  which  exist  are  accurate  ? 

1  Eeuss,  335,  336,  345,  346.  «  Idem,  157,  224  -228. 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


61 


8    The  whole  has  depended  upon  the  faithfulness  of  chams 
of  copyists,  transcribing  in  succession  through  the  past  cen- 
turies    the   one  after  the  other.      The   early   writing  was  a 
representation  of  continuous  letters  without  division  into  words, 
and  in  making  the  separation  of  the  words  error  would  arise. 
The  manuscripts  were  subject  to  damage  anj  P-tial  oblitera- 
tion  rendering  them  difficult  to  decipher.     Abbreviations  were 
usei  in  them  which  were  not  always  understood      Glosses  in 
the  margin  were  apt  to  be  introduced  a.  part  of  the  text  i  sell; 
and  even  intentional  alterations  were  sometimes  ^^^J^^^^^^^^^^^^ 
view  to  improvement.^     When  printing  wa.  invented  the  text 
became  in  a  measure  fixed.     The  first  printed  edition  of  the 

New  Testament  was  issued  in  1516.  Earliest 

P    You  indicate  a  long  era  of  liability  to  errors  and  altera-  EaH,est 

tions' through  the  agency  of  copyists.     What  is  the  age  of  the  script.. 

earliest  existing  manuscripts  t  „  ,  -nn.  •* 

S    The  first  known  of  is  the  Vatican  Codex.     Whence  it 
was  acquired  is  not  known.     It  appears  in  a  catalogjre  of  the 
year  1475.     This  contains  the  Apocrypha  of  the  Old  lesta- 
Lnt.  and  is  deficient  as  to  the   New  in  the  four  and  a  half 
Tast  ;hapters  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  the  Epistles  to 
Timothy,  Titus,  and  Philemon,  and  the  Apocalypse.     The  next 
discovered  is  the  Alexandrine  Codex.     This  was  presented  t^ 
the  kinc.  of  England   (Charles  I.)  in  1628  by  the  patriarch 
of  ConsUntinople,  but  how  it  came  into  his  hands,  save  that 
he  obtained  it  in  Alexandria,  is  not  apparent.     This  also  con- 
tains the  Apocrypha  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  the  epistle  of 
cTment  of^Eome,  a  letter  by  Athanasius,  and  a  treatise  by 
Eusebius.      A  third  is  the  Sinaitic  Codex,  discovered  in  the 
shape  of  waste  paper  by  Dr  Tischendorf  m  a  convent  on  Mount 
SinS^  in  ^844  and  1859.      Its  previous  history  is  unknown 
IhTc  py  lo  contains  the  Apocrypha  of  the  Old JesUm^"^. 
the   ep^Ile   of  Barnaba.s,  and  a  portion  of  the  Shepherd  of 
Hermas      The  real  ages  of  these  manuscripts  is  uncertain  but 
fheTeled  venture  t^  surmise  that  they  may  be  thrown  back 

*"  t  irs*Vet7of  the  New  Testament,  such  as  it  is,  afford  C£^o, 

any  support  to  that  of  the  Old  ?  **^^^*' 

\      ,   -on-    ir,^fi.>i«m  a  Professor  Stowe,  82. 

:?^SdtrSu";::rto  t.e  New  Te«t.Profe.o.  Stow. 

64-73. 


62 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


63 


Discern- 
ment of 
word  of 
Ood  in 
scriptures. 


S.  Not  to  the  original  text  of  the  Old  Testament.      ''  The 

quotations,"  says  Sharpe,  "are  usually  taken  from  the  Greek 

translation,  called  the  Septuagint."^     Sometimes  they  are  from 

the  Targums  or  Chaldee  versions,  which  were  made  from  the 

time  of  Ezra  onwards.     Dean  Prideaux  points  out  that  when 

Jesus  is  said  to  have  read  from  Isaiah  in  the  synagogue  (Luke 

iv.  16-19),   the  words  do  not  agree  exactly  either  with  the 

Hebrew  or  the  Septuagint  version,  and  seem  therefore  to  have 

come  from  one  of  these  Targums.      He  also  notices  that  when 

Jesus  gave  the  famous  utterance  attributed  to  him  when  on 

the  cross,   "  Eli,  Eli,  lama  Sabachthani,"  he  used  a  Chaldee 

word,   "  Sabachthani,"  in  lieu  of  the  Hebrew  word  "  Azab- 
tani."2 

P.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  when  one  inspired  record  had 
occasion  to  refer  to  another  inspired  record,  uninspired  transla- 
tions were  the  medium  made  use  of,  and  this  even  when  the 
citations  of  a  divine  personage,  such  as  Jesus  is  said  to  have 
been,  were  in  question  ? 

>S^.   So  it  was,  certainly. 

P.  The  Septuagint  contains  a  number  of  spurious  books. 
When  this  version  was  used  by  the  writers  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, was  it  pointed  out  by  them  that  these  productions  were 
no  real  part  of  the  divine  record  ? 

S.  This  was  not  done. 

P.  When  the  declaration  was  made  that  "  all  scripture 
is  given  by  inspiration  of  God,"  would  not  this  embrace  the 
Apocrypha  also  which  appear  in  the  version  used  for  citation, 
unless  the  contrary  were  said  ? 

S.  Naturally,  that  would  be  a  fair  inference  to  draw. 

P,  If  we  are  left  without  landmarks  whereby  to  trace  these 
scriptures,  both  Old  and  New,  to  their  authors,  and  there  are 
no  means  of  associating  such  authors,  whoever  they  may  have 
been,  with  God,  in  any  act  of  his  inspiring  them ;  and  if  the 
existing  versions  have  been  transmitted  from  one  copyist  and 
translator  to  another  through  channels  the  trustworthiness  of 
which  cannot  be  ascertained,  in  what  way  is  it  possible  to  dis- 
cern in  these  records  the  actual  "  Word  of  God"  ? 

S.  The  actual  word  certainly  cannot  be  traced  out. 


P.   What  assurance,  then,  is  there  that  in  the  Bible  there 
is  any  divine  communication  to  man  at  all  ? 

S.   When  the  outworks  cannot  be  seen  to  stand,  nothing  of 
course   remains   but   the   internal   evidence,    afforded   by    the 
matter  of  the  book  itself,  that  it  consists  of  revelations  which 
are  superhuman,  and  therefore  divine.      It  is,  in  fact,   on  the 
sense  of  its  being  thus  superhuman,  that  the  Bible  is,  for  the 
most  part,  practically  accepted  as  the  Word  of  God.      This  was 
the  ground  which  the  early  Reformers  took  in  judging  of  its 
contents  and  discriminating  between  the  several  books  which 
claimed  to  be  a  portion  of  the  sacred  record.      Having  disal- 
lowed the   doctrine   of  the   Catholic   church,  they   could  not 
admit  its  right   to  make  the  Bible.      Calvin   contended  that 
the  Word  of  God  could  not  be  dependent  on  the  work  and 
authority  of  man.      He  trusted  to  the  spirit  of  God  to  esta- 
blish  it  and   to    expose  counterfeits.       Zwingle  had   already 
announced  this  principle.      The  Confession  of  Faith  put  forth 
in  1536  at  Basle,  was  to  the  like  effect.      So   also  were  the 
second  Swiss  Confession  by  Beze  and  Bullinger  made  in  1566, 
and  the  Confessions  of  the  French  and  of  the  Scotch  churches. 
The  English  Church,  however,  depended  in  her  articles  on  the 
force  of  usage,   and    such  was  the   theory   of  the  Bohemian 

Church.^ 

P.  Thank  you.  I  thought  that  the  investigation  I  pro- 
posed to  myself  was  drawing  to  a  close,  but  you  open  out  to 
me  further  field  for  investigation. 

1  Keuss,  313-319. 


1  Historic  Notes  on  the  Bible,  234.  «  Giles'  Hebrew  Records,  61,  note. 


MIEACLES. 


III. 

RENEWED  CONVERSATION. 


Evidence  to 
miracles. 


Pundit. — Will  you  be  good  enough  to  inform  me  what 
matter  there  is  in  the  Bible  which  professes  prominently  to  be 
of  a  superhuman  character. 

Student. — There  appear  in  the  Bible  two  special  methods 
in  which  God  is  held  to  have  demonstrated  power,  such  as  no 
human  being  can  have  possessed ;  namely,  the  enactment  of 
miracles,  and  the  utterance  of  prophecies.  These  are  what  are 
primarily  relied  on  for  evidence  to  the  outer  world  of  the 
divine  character  of  the  book. 

P.  What  do  you  mean  by  a  miracle  ? 

S.  I  mean  an  act  of  a  wonderful  kind,  in  disturbance  of 
every  idea  we  have  of  a  natural  operation,  by  which  it  is  meant 
that  we  should  see  that  the  hand  of  God  has  worked,  in  some 
special  manner,  for  some  particular  end,  so  as  to  convince  us 
that  the  thing  in  question  is  of  him,  and  not  of  man.  It  is  in 
such  a  sense  that  we  are  called  upon  to  view  and  accept  the 
miracles  in  the  Bible. 

P.  We  have  people  among  us  who  pretend  to  some  sort  of 
superhuman  power.  How  are  one  set  of  marvels  to  influence 
us  more  than  another  ?  I  have  seen  through  the  pretensions 
of  our  people.  May  not  the  miracles  of  the  Bible  prove  of  the 
same  untrustworthy  sort  ? 

S.  What  credit  is  due  to  them  must  of  course  depend  upon 
examination  ? 

P.  On  whose  word  am  I  to  believe  the  miracles  of  the 

Bible  ? 

B.  On  the  word  of  the  writers  of  the  Bible. 


MIRACLES. 


65 


,« 


;l 


N 


P.  But  they  appear  for  the   most  part   to  be  absolutely 

unknown  ! 

S.  That  is  so  certainly. 

P  And  whoever  they  were,  they  lived  so  long  ago  that  no 
one  can  say  whether  they  were  people  to  be  trusted  or  not^ 
They  may  have  uttered  what  is  untrue  for  some  purpose  ot 
their  own,  or  they  may  have  themselves  been  deluded  mto 
believing  what  more  competent  persons  would  have  rejected  as 
unreliable. 

S.  That  is  true.  . 

P.  Was  the  age  in  which  the  narrators  of  these  miracles 

lived  an  enlightened  one,  or  the  contrary  ? 

8  Those  were  far  from  being  what  we  recognize  as  en- 
liahtencd  times.  They  believed  then  in  magic,  sorcery,  witch- 
craft, divination,  dreams,  visions,  evil  spirits,  and  possessions. 
They  thoucrht  the  common  sicknesses  and  infirmities  ot  man- 
kind were^caused  by  evil  beings  of  the  spiritual  world  taking 
up  their  abode  in  the  sufferers,  from  whom  they  had  to  be 
elected  They  also  believed  in  visitations  of  angels  and  appa- 
ritions of  God  himself.  I  speak  of  the  times  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament as  well  as  of  those  of  the  Old. 

P.  Then  one  must  receive  with  great  caution  the  statements 
of  men  so  addicted  to  rely  on  the  marvellous. 

S    One  would  think  so. 

P.  Do  the  narrators  of  the  miracles  profess  to  have  seen 

what  they  describe  as  miracles  ?  .  r  ^v 

S  They  profess  more  or  less  to  have  had  cognizance  ot  the 
circumstances  narrated  by  them,  but  scarcely  in  language  such 
as  would  be  used  by  eye-witnesses.  And  as  these  writers  are 
unknown,  and  lived,  as  it  may  be  judged,  at  times  remote  from 
the  events  described  by  them,  it  becomes  apparent  that  they 
had  their  materials  from  others. 

P  That  is,  these  unknown  writers  tell  us  what  they  say  they 
have  heard  from  unknown  parties,  who  may  have  handed  down 
these  stories  from  one  to  the  other  through  a  succession  of 

credulous  persons !  ^     ,,  • 

8  It  is  so  We  have  no  better  support  for  these  miracu- 
lous'exhibitions  in  the  way  of  evidence,  unless  you  can  accept 

the  accounts  as  inspired.  •      i„„ 

P.    But   I    thought    we    were    to    receive    the    miracles 


66 


MIRACLES. 


MIRACLES. 


67 


Test  of 
divinely 
wroucfht 
miracles. 


Ij'ncr 
miracles. 


themselves,  firstly,  as  proofs  of  the  divine   authority  of  the 

Bible  ! 

S.   It  should  be  so,  certainly. 

P.  As  witchcraft  and  magic  were  believed  in  in  those  days, 
I  presume  there  were  marvels  enacted  which  were  traceable  to 
such  sources,  as  well  as  the  miracles  that  were  ascribed  to  God. 
Was  there  any  rule,  or  test,  by  which  to  distinguish  the  divine 
miracles  from  the  others  ? 

S.  There  was.  It  is  laid  down,  "  If  there  arise  among  you 
a  prophet,  or  a  dreamer  of  dreams,  and  giveth  thee  a  sign  or 
a  wonder,  and  the  sign  or  the  wonder  come  to  pass  w^hereof 
he  spake  unto  thee,  saying,  Let  us  go  after  other  gods,  which 
thou  hast  not  known,  and  let  us  serve  them  ;  thou  shalt  not 
hearken  unto  the  words  of  that  prophet,  or  that  dreamer  of 
dreams :  for  the  Lord  your  God  proveth  you,  to  know  whether 
ye  love  the  Lord  your  God  with  all  your  heart  and  with  all 
your  soul"  (Deut.  xiii.  1-3). 

P.  Then  it  requires  that  one  should  be  sound  in  doctrine 
in  order  to  discern  whether  a  marvel  has  been  enacted  by  God 
for  a  good  end,  or  by  a  deceiver  for  a  bad  one. 
S.  So  it  appears. 

P.  I  understood  that  the  miracle  was  to  lead  to  the  recog- 
nition of  the  true  God,  but  here  it  seems  that  the  knowledge 
of  the  true  God  is  necessary  to  the  recognition  of  the  miracle. 
S.  It  certainly  is  so  laid  down. 

P.  I  observe  also  that  the  miracles  of  the  deceivers  are  said 
to  be  sanctioned  by  God  in  order  to  prove  his  people.  Can  God 
really  lend  himself  to  these  false  demonstrations  ? 

S,  So  it  is  assuredly  stated.  Tho  object  appears  to  be  not 
only  to  prove  those  who  have  received  the  knowledge  of  God, 
but  to  complete  the  destruction  of  those  who  have  not  appre- 
hended him.  "The  mystery  of  iniquity,"  it  is  declared,  "doth 
already  work :  only  he  who  now  letteth  will  let,  until  he  be 
taken  out  of  the  way.  And  then  shall  that  wicked  be  revealed, 
whom  the  Lord  shall  consume  with  the  spirit  of  his  mouth,  and 
shall  destroy  with  the  brightness  of  his  coming:  even  him, 
whose  coming  is  after  the  working  of  Satan,  with  all  power  and 
signs  and  lying  wonders.  And  with  all  deceivableness  of  un- 
righteousness in  them  that  perish  ;  because  they  received  not 
the  love  of  the  truth,  that  they  might  be  saved.     And  for  this 


T 


i 


cause  God  shall  send  them  strong  delusion,  that  they  should 
believe  a  lie  :  that  they  all  might  be  damned  who  believed  not 
the  truth,  but  had  pleasure  in  unrighteousness "  (2  Thess.  ii. 
7-12).  This  relates  to  the  last  and  still  future  days  of  the 
present  dispensation,  of  which  again  it  is  said,  "  Then  if  any 
man  shall  say  unto  you,  Lo,  here  is  Christ,  or  there ;  believe 
it  not.  For  there  shall  arise  false  Christs,  and  false  prophets, 
and  shall  show  great  signs  and  wonders,  insomuch  that,  if  it 
were    possible,    they    shall    deceive    the    very    elect"    (Matt. 

xxiv.  24)). 

P.  I  see  that  these  wonder-workers  are  to  assume  the 
appearance  of  instruments  of  godliness.  They  are  to  come  as 
if  being  Christ  himself,  and  are  to  act  in  a  way  to  deceive,  if 
they  can,  the  very  elect  of  God. 

S.  Yes.     That   sort  of  misrepresentation  appears  to   have 
been   current   from  the   earliest  times   of  the  Christian    era. 
There  were    then    "false    apostles,   deceitful    workers,   trans- 
forming   themselves    into    the   apostles    of   Christ.      And   no 
marvel,"  it  is  added,  "  for  Satan  himself  is  transformed  into 
an   angel    of   light.      Therefore   it  is  no  great   thing   if  his 
ministers   also  be  transformed  as  the  ministers  of  righteous- 
ness "  (2  Cor.  xi.   13-15).     And  these  deceivers  so  ape  the 
position  and  work  of  the  true  emissaries  of  God,  that  they 
think  even  to  impose  themselves  on  Christ  himself  as  persons 
who  have  been   labouring  in  his  cause.      "  Many  will  say  to 
me  in  that  day.  Lord,  Lord,  have  we  not  prophesied  in  thy 
name  ?  and  in  thy  name  have  cast  out  devils  ?  and  in  thy  name 
done  many  wonderful  works  ?     And  then  will  I  profess  unto 
them,  I   never  knew    you  :    depart  from  me,    ye   that  work 
iniquity"  (Matt.  vii.  22,  23). 

P.  I  presume  the  lying  wonders  are  of  a  very  different  stamp 
from  the  true  ones,  and  may  be  seen,  by  a  discerning  person, 
not  to  be  of  superhuman  origin. 

S.  On  the  contrary,  they  are  declared  to  be  superhuman, 
being  enacted  with  all  the  power  of  Satan,  who  is  described  as 
a  superhuman  being. 

P.   Can    you    point    out    samples  of   this   sort    of  wonder 

working  ? 

S.  Yes.  In  the  time  of  Moses  God  is  said  to  have  em- 
powered Aaron  to   work  wonders,  in   order  to   convince  the 


68 


MIRACLES. 


Combina- 
tion of 
miracles 
and  doc- 
trine. 


kincr  of  Egypt  that  he  was  an  emissary  from  God      Aaron 
begin  by  changing  his  rod  into  a  serpent,  turmng  the  watei^ 
of  the  country  into  blood,  and  creating  myriads  of  frogs,  which 
covered  the  land  ;  and  the  king's  magicians,  by  means  of  their 
enchantments,  did  the  like.     Each  man  threw  down  his  rod 
and  it  became  a  serpent-a  real  one,  for  Aaron  s  serpent  eat 
these  up ;  the  water  was  converted  into  real  blood,  for  there 
is  nothing  to  show  that  there  was  mere  discoloration   pro- 
duced ;  and  the  frogs  called  into  being  were  of  course  true 
fro-s  and  not  imitations  merely,  which  could  have  deceived  no 
one  '   Then   the  wonder-workers  whom  Christ  is   to  disown 
appear  to  be  able  to  cast  out  devils  just  as  well  as  he  did 
himself ;  and  in  the  last  days,  when  Satan  and  his  emissaries 
are  to  come  out  in  full  power,  there  will  be  one  of  them  who 
will  be  able  to  "  make  fire  come  down  from  heaven  on  the 
earth  in  the  sight  of  men,"  and  will  have  "  power  to  give  life 
unto  the   image"   of  another  being,   who  is  described  as  a 
"  beast,"  and  to  make  it  "  speak  "  and  issue  orders  (Rev.  xiii. 
13-15).     Now  Christ  is  said  to  have  turned  water  into  wine, 
which  is  analogous  to  the  magician's  conversion  of  water  into 
blood,  but  he  never  did  anything  so  calculated  to  give  public 
demonstration  of  being  armed  with   divine  power  as  to  call 
down  fire  from  heaven,  nor  so  strikingly  beyond  the  bounds  ot 
man's  common  capabilities  as  to  turn  a  dead  stick  into  a  live 
animal,  to  call  into  being  a  multitude  of  other  living  creatures 
created  apparently  out  of  nothing,  or  to  put  life  into  an  inani- 
mate image,  so  as  to  impart  to  it  volition  and  speech.     The 
nearest  approaches  he  is  said  to  have  made  to  the  last  two 
wonders  are  the  multiplication  of  food,  and  the  restoring  life  to 
the  dead,  but  these  are  certainly  short  of  the  creation  of  hfe 
where  previously  there  had  been  no  life. 

P.  You  astonish  me.     If  the  lying  wonders  transcend  the 
divine  miracles  in  magnitude  of  effect  and  power,  for  what  pur- 
pose can  the  real  miracles  have  been  put  forth  at  aU  ? 
S.  That  I  am  unable  to  explain. 

P.  From  what  you  said  before,  the  real  test  of  a  miracle,  as 
to  its  originating  with  God,  or  with  deceivers,  is  the  test  of 
the  accompanying  doctrine,  whether  that  be  true  or  false. 
After  what  method  did  Jesus  combine  his  doctrine  with  his 
miracles  ? 


■■ 


MIRACLES. 


69 


8    He  said  that  he  came  from  God,  and  that  his  miracles 
were  an  evidence  thereof.     On  one  occasion  a  palsied  man  was 
brouc^ht  to  him,  and  Jesus  comforted  him  by  tellmg  him  that 
his  sins  were  forgiven  him,  and  when  his  power  to  e-rase  the 
divine  privilege   of  forgiving    sins  was    questioned    he  said, 
"Whether  is  it  easier  to  say.  thy  sins  be  forgiven   hee  or  ^ 
sav  arise,  and  walk  ?     But  that  ye  may  know  that  the  Son  ot 
r^L  hath  power  on  earth  to  forgive  sins  (then  saith  he  to  the 
"ck  of  th^  palsy)  arise,  take  up  thy  ^ed  -d  go  -to  thine 
house"  which  the  sick  man  accordmgly  did  (Matt.  ix.   1  »> 
On  alther  occasion,  a  message  was  sent  to  him  that  a  f^^nd 
of  his,  named  Lazarus,  was  dying.     Jesus  puiposely  delay  j 
his  coming  until  the  man  was  dead,  and  then  said,     I  am  glad 
for  Tour  sikes  that  I  was  not  there,  to  the  intent  you  m^  be- 
lieve."    After  this,  he  "  lifted  up  his  eyes,  and  ^aid  JatW 
I  thank  thee  that  thou  hast  heard  me,  and  I  kne.'^^that  thou 
hearest  me  always ;  but  because  of  the  people  which  stand  by 
I  said  it    that  they  may  believe  that  thou  hast  sent  me. 
Then  he  Us  upon  the  dead  man  with  a  loud  voice  to  come 
forth   and  he  does  so  (John  xi.  15,  41-44). 
'p'Tcan    see   no  more    in    this    than  that  the  miracles 
were  to  prove  the  doctrine,  which  doctrine  might  m  itself  be 
dler  true  or  otherwise.     In  what  respect  does  such  a  me  hod 
differ  from  that  of  the  false   Christs  who  are  to  appeal  to 
miracles  in  proof  of  their  mission  ? 

S.  I  cannot  tell  you.  ,,  ,    ,  ,  , 

P    Who  did  Christ  say  of  himself  that  he  was  ? 

S  He  professes  to  have  been  divinely  begotten  without  a 
human  father,  and  thus  to  be  the  Son  of  God 

P  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  he  set  himself  up  as  on  a  par 
with  God  in  point  of  constitution  of  being  and  nature,  as  a 
human  son  is  with  a  human  father.  ^^ 

S  Yes  He  is  described  as  the  Logos,  or  word,  who  in 
the  beginning,"  that  is,  before  the  creation  (Gen.  i.  1).  was 
"  iith  God  "and  "  was  God"  (John  i.  1).  He  said  "I  and 
my  Father  are  one"  (John  x.  30);  that  whosoever  had  seen 
S'm  had  seen  the  Father  (John  xiv.  9) ;  that  as  men  believ^ 
i.  God,  so  al.  were  they  to  ^^Z;i^^f,^'^^^^^^^^ 


i 


70 


MIRACLES. 


MIRACLES. 


71 


God,"  he  "thought  it  not  robbery  to  be  equal  with  God"  (Phil. 
ii.  6),  and  when  addressed  by  one  of  his  followers  as  his  Lord 
and  his  God,  he  accepted  the  homage,  and  said  that  they  were 
specially  objects  of  blessing,  who  should  so  believe  of  him  with- 
out having  had  the  privilege  of  actually  seeing  him  (John  xx. 
28,  29). 

P.  But  was  he  not  personally  a  man  in  all  respects  such  as 
one  of  ourselves  ? 

S.  Assuredly  he  was  so.  He  was  born  of  a  woman,  became 
developed  from  infancy,  through  childhood,  to  manhood ;  that  is, 
he  "  increased  in  wisdom  and  stature"  (Luke  ii.  52)  as  we  do  ; 
he  was  subjected  to  all  the  ''  infirmities"  of  our  nature,  being 
"  in  all  points  tempted  as  we  are"  (Heb.  iv.  1  5)  ;  and  he  suf- 
fered death  as  any  other  mortal  man. 

P.  Then  his  doctrine  was  that  there  were  two  Gods,  himself 
and  his  Father. 

S,  They  are  called,  in  some  sense  I  cannot  explain  to  you, 
one,  but  are  nevertheless  exhibited  to  us  as  two.  For  example, 
in  the  passages  I  have  cited,  Jesus  is  said  to  have  been  "  with 
God,"  and  himself  to  "  be  God."  He  could  not  be  said  to  be 
with  God,  unless  also  distinct  from  God.  God  being  with 
himself  is  not  a  circumstance  that  it  would  have  beeu  neces- 
sary to  announce  to  us.  He  said  that  while  they  believed  in 
God,  they  were  to  believe  "also"  in  him,  the  distinctness  of 
object  being  again  apparent.  And  in  the  same  sense  of  dis- 
tinctive being  he  felt  it  was  no  robbery  to  look  on  himself  as 
"equal"  with  God.  Then  we  have  him  in  the  narratives 
given  of  him  praying  to  the  Father,  feeling  forsaken  by  him, 
and  being  offered  up  to  him  as  a  propitiatory  sacrifice,  each 
position  presenting  us  with  a  distinctive  being.  In  fact,  there 
are  three  such  spoken  of,  and  not  merely  two.  The  third  is 
the  Holy  Ghost,  or  the  comforter,  whom  he  promised  to  send 
to  his  people.  "  It  is  expedient  for  you,"  he  told  them,  "  that  I 
go  away,  for  if  I  go  not  away,  the  comforter  v/ill  not  come  unto 
you,  but  if  I  depart  I  will  send  him  unto  you"  (John  xvi.  7). 

P.  This  resembles  the  Hindoo  Trimurti,  or  three  gods  in 
one.      Had  the  Jews  any  more  Gods  than  one  ? 

S.  They  were  distinctly  told  that  for  them  there  was  but 
one.  "  Hear,  0  Israel,  the  Lord  our  God  is  one  Lord"  (Deut. 
vi.  4).     "  Know,  therefore,  this  day,  and  consider  it  in  thine 


heart,  that  the  Lord  he  is  God  in  heaven  above,  and  upon  the 
earth  beneath,  there  is  none  else"  (Deut.  iv.  39). 

P.  I  thought  it  was  the  test  of  a  false  miracle  if  the  wonder- 
worker should  say,  "  let  us  go  after  other  gods,"  there  being, 
it  seems,  but  one  God  for  the  Jews  ;  and  here  you  have  Jesus 
enacting  miracles  to  prove  that  there  are  more  Gods  than  one, 
and  that  he  himself  is  one  of  three  ! 

S.  I  am  unable  to  answer  you. 

P.  Would  you  be  good  enough  to  give  me  an  idea  what  the 
marvels  are  which  are  recounted  in  the  Old  as  well  as  the  New 

Testament  ? 

S.  I  have  collected  the  whole  together  in  a  paper  from  which 
I  will  read  to  you.      It  is  rather  a  lengthy  statement. 

There  is  an  account  of  a  serpent  which  held  a  conversation 
with  the  first  woman  Eve.      Moses  changed  his  rod  into  a 
serpent,  and  then  turned  the  serpent  back  into  the  rod  ;  Aaron 
turned  his  rod  into  a  serpent,  and  the  magicians  of  Pharaoh 
did  the  like  with  their  rods.     Moses  set  up  a  brazen  serpent, 
the  mere  looking  at  which  cured  people  who  were  bitten  by 
real  serpents.      Frogs,  lice,  and  swarms  of  flies  were  created 
miraculously.     An  ass  spoke  to  the  prophet  Balaam,  reasoning 
with  him,  and  rebuking  him.     A  man  of  God  is  betrayed  into  an 
act  of  disobedience  by  a  false  prophet.     The  false  prophet  is  then 
inspired  by  God  to  sentence  him  to  a  violent  end.      On  this  a 
lion  meets  with  and  kills  him,  but  does  not  tear  his  carcase  or 
molest  his  ass.     The  lion  and  the  ass  are  found,  in  fact,  stand- 
ing by  the  carcase.     The  prophet  Daniel  is  thrown  into  a  lion  s 
den,  but  by  God's  interposition  the  lions  do  not  touch  him. 
The  prophet  Elijah,  when  in  a  desert  place,  is  fed  by  ravens, 
who  provisioned  him  by  the  "  command  of  God."     The  pro- 
phet Elisha  is  taunted  by  some  children  with  being  bald.     He 
curses  them  in  the  name  of  the  Lord,  and  thereupon  two  bears 
came  and  killed  forty-two   of  them.      A  whale  is  made   to 
swallow  the  prophet  Jonah,  and  to  throw  him  up  alive  on  shore 
after  he  had  been  in  him  three  days.    Jesus  provides  himself  with 
tribute-money  from  a  fish  who  had  it  in  readiness,  holding  it  for 
him  in  his  mouth.     The  Holy  Ghost  descends  upon  Jesus  in 
the  form  of  a  dove.     And  a  herd  of  swine,  numbering  about  two 
thousand,  became  possessed  with  devils  cast  out  of  a  man,  and 


Account 
of  the 
miracles 
and  mar- 
vels. 


Miracles 

with 

animals. 


i 


— with 
water. 


72 


MIRACLES. 


I 


rush  into  the  sea  and  drown  themselves.     These,  you  will  ob- 
serve, are  marvels  acted  out  with  animals. 

In  another  group  water  is  the  element  operated  with. 
Aaron  turns  the  waters  of  Egypt  into  blood,  and  Pharaoh's 
magicians  do  the  same.  Jesus  turns  jars  of  water  into  wine 
to  furnish  additional  supplies  for  a  feast.  The  Red  Sea  is 
divided  for  the  passage  of  the  Israelites  into  the  wilderness, 
and  the  Jordan  for  their  passage  out  of  it.  The  Jordan  is 
again  divided  by  Elijah  with  a  stroke  of  his  mantle  to  allow 
of  Elisha  and  himself  crossing  the  river  ;  and  Elisha  performs 
the  feat  immediately  afterwards,  with  the  same  mantle,  in  order 
to  get  back  again.  Moses  changes  bitter  waters  into  sweet  by 
casting  a  certain  tree  into  them  ;  and  Elisha  makes  poisonous 
waters  wholesome  by  throwing  in  salt.  Moses  twice  draws 
water  from  rocks  by  a  blow  of  his  rod,  once  at  Horeb,  and  the 
second  time  at  Meribah.  The  fleece  of  Gideon  is  made 
alternately  wet  and  dry.  Elijah  creates  a  drought  for  three 
years  and  a  half  by  stopping  all  supplies  of  rain  and  dew. 
Elisha  puts  an  end  to  another  drought  by  making  water  pour  in 
from  a  neighbouring  and  very  arid  territory,  Edom.  Naaman 
is  cured  of  leprosy  by  bathing,  at  a  prophet's  command,  seven 
times  in  Jordan.  An  angel  periodically  disturbs  the  water  of 
a  pool  at  Bethesda,  and  whoever  first  steps  in  is  cured  of  any 
malady  he  may  have.  A  blind  man,  after  having  his  eyes  an- 
ointed by  Jesus  with  clay,  is  restored  to  sight  on  washing  in  the 
pool  of  Siloam.  Jesus  smooths  the  troubled  waves  of  the  sea  in 
stormy  weather.  The  iron  head  of  an  axe,  which  had  accidentally 
fallen  into  water,  is  made  to  float  by  the  prophet  Elisha,  and 
is  thus  recovered.  Jesus  and  Peter  walk  on  the  waves  of  a 
boisterous  sea  as  if  on  firm  land, 
-with  fire.  In  another  group  fire  is  the  medium  used.  An  angelic 
being,  stationed  at  the  garden  of  Eden,  has  a  flaming  sword 
which  turns  every  way.  Abraham  offers  up  a  sacrifice,  when 
a  smoking  furnace  appears,  with  a  burning  lamp,  which  passes 
between  the  pieces  of  the  victims  he  had  cut  up.  The  exhibi- 
tion of  miraculous  fire  is  a  common  demonstration  of  the  ac- 
ceptance of  a  sacrifice.  When  Aaron  sacrifices,  fire  comes  out 
**  from  before  the  Lord,"  and  consumes  the  burnt  offering. 
When  Gideon,  (who  was  not  of  the  priesthood,)  makes  a  sacri- 
ficial offering,  fire  comes  out  of  a   rock  at  the  touch  of  an 


I 


MIRACLES. 


73 


angel,  and  burns  up  the  offering.  When  Manoah,  (also  not  of 
the  priesthood,)  sacrifices,  an  angel  ascends  in  the  flame  of  the 
altar.  When  Elijah,  (also  not  of  the  priesthood,)  has  his  trial 
in  sacrifice  with  the  priests  of  Baal,  "the  fire  of  the  Lord" 
descends  and  consumes  the  off*ering.  And  David's  sacrifice, 
and  afterwards  Solomon's,  (neither  being  of  the  priesthood,)  are 
thus  consumed  with  heavenly  fire.  God  rains  brimstone  and 
fire  upon  Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  and  all  the  cities  of  the  plain, 
and  destroys  the  whole  with  their  inhabitants.  Nadab  and 
Abihu  are  "  devoured"  with  "  fire  from  the  Lord"  for  using 
other  than  the  sacred  fire  for  their  censers.  When  the  Israelites 
utter  complaint  in  the  wilderness;,  the  "  fire  of  the  Lord"  con- 
sumes many  of  them.  "  Fire  from  the  Lord"  destroys  two 
hundred  and  fifty  persons  who  offered  incense  in  conjunction 
with  Korah,  Dathan,  and  Abiram,  when  they  sought  to  invade 
the  priestly  office.  Two  successive  bodies,  consisting  each  of  an 
officer  and  fifty  men,  are  deputed  by  the  king  of  Israel  to  bring 
Elijah  before  him,  but  he  rids  himself  of  them,  on  each  oc- 
casion, by  calling  down  fire  from  heaven  which  destroys  them. 
An  angel  appears  to  Moses  in  a  flame  of  fire  in  a  bush  which 
burns  without  being  consumed.  The  Lord  descends  upon 
Mount  Sinai  in  fire,  and  the  smoke  ascends  as  that  of  a  furnace, 
the  fire  burning  up  "  unto  the  midst  of  heaven."  Shadrach, 
Meschach,  and  Abed-nego,  are  bound  and  thrown  into  a  fiery 
furnace,  but  not  even  their  hair  or  garments  are  singed.  God 
goes  before  the  Israelites  in  a  pillar  of  cloud  by  day,  and  a 
pillar  of  fire  by  night,  to  lead  them  in  all  their  wanderings  in 
the  wilderness.  A  visitation  of  fire  is  made  to  Elijah  when 
alone  in  the  wilderness.  When  he  has  run  his  career,  he  is  taken 
up  in  a  chariot  of  fire,  with  horses  of  fire,  bodily,  to  heaven. 
His  successor  Elisha  is  afterwards  seen  on  a  "  mountain  full  of 
horses  and  chariots  of  fire  round  about"  him.  And  cloven 
tongues,  as  of  fire,  descend  on  the  disciples  of  Jesus  at  the  feast 
of  Pentecost. 

A  fourth  group  is  connected  with  supplies  of  food.  A  sub-  -^th 
stance  called  manna  was  showered  down  for  the  Israelites 
daily  during  their  forty  years  wandering  in  the  wilderness. 
As  they  could  not  work  on  the  Sabbaths,  a  double  supply  was 
always  sent  them  on  the  days  preceding.  This  has  been  de- 
scribed as  "angels'  food,"  and   "bread  from  heaven."     The 


i 


^~ 


I 


74 


MIRACLES. 


MIRACLES. 


75 


I 


Miscellane 
ous  mir- 
acles. 


supplies  brought  by  the  ravens  to  Elijah  consisted  of  bread 
and  meat,  which  they  gave  him  daily,  morning  and  evening. 
After  this,  by  the  divine  command,  during  the  drought  of  three 
years  and  a  half,  called  down  by  himself,  he  goes  to  a  poor 
widow  for  his  provisions.     She  has  nothing  but  a  handful  of 
meal  and  a  little  oil  in  a  cruse,  of  which  she  makes  cakes  for 
the  prophet,  herself,  and  son.      But  till  the  rain  comes  down, 
and   fresh   supplies   become   procurable,  the   meal  and   oil  are 
miraculously  renewed.     Elisha  falls  in  with  a  poor  woman  who 
has  nothing  left  in  her  house  but  a  pot  of  oil.      He  bids  her 
borrow  as  many  vessels  as  she  can  from  her  neighbours,  and 
after  shutting  the  door,  pour  in  the  oil.     The  oil  flows  till  it 
has  filled  all  the  vessels,  and  then  is  stayed.      Elisha  bids  her 
sell  the  oil,  pay  off  her  debts,  and  live  upon  the  residue.      The 
companions  of  Elisha,  in  a  time  of  dearth,  make  a  pottage  of 
herbs,  wild  vine,  and  wild  gourds.     As  they  eat  it  they  find  it 
to  be  poisonous,  and  say,  "There  is  death  in  the  pot."     Elisha 
makes  the  food  wholesome  by  throwing  in  some  meal.     Twenty 
loaves  are  brought  to  him,  with  which,  to  their  great  surprise, 
he  satisfies  a  hundred  men,  a  surplus  remaining  unconsumed. 
Jesus  performs  the  same  miracle  twice,  but  on  a  larger  scale. 
On  one  occasion,  with  five  loaves  and  two  fishes  he  satisfies  five 
thousand  men,  besides  women  and   children,  there  remaining 
twelve  baskets  full  of  remnants  over.      On  another,  he  provides 
for  four  thousand  men,  besides  women  and  children,  with  seven 
loaves  and  a  few  little   fishes,  and  remnants  are  left  that  fill 
seven  baskets. 

Then  there  are  miracles  of  a  miscellaneous  order  which 
cannot  be  thus  classified.  Lot's  wife  is  turned  into  a  pillar  of 
salt  for  venturing  to  look  back  at  the  judgment  executing  upon 
Sodom.  Seven  priests,  with  seven  trumpets  of  rams'  horns,  and 
the  ark  of  the  covenant  following  them,  march  round  the 
besieged  city  of  Jericho,  once  daily,  blowing  on  their  trumpets. 
On  the  seventh  day  they  march  round  the  city  seven  times, 
trumpeting,  and  the  people,  at  the  command  of  Joshua,  shout, 
and  the  walls  of  the  city  fall  flat,  whereupon  the  Israelites 
take  possession  of  it.  The  Israelites  overcome  the  Amorites 
in  battle,  slaughtering  many  of  them.  "  The  Lord  casts  down 
great  stones  from  heaven  "  on  the  flying  enemy,  killing  more 
than  had  been  slain  with  the  sword.     Joshua,  to  prolong  the 


i 


« 


v) 
#1 


time  for  wreaking  vengeance  on  the  already  discomfited  foe, 
commands  the  sun  to  "  stand  still  on  Gibeon,"  and  the  moon 
"  in  the  valley  of  Ajalon,"  and  "  so  the  sun  stood  still  in  the 
midst  of  heaven,  and  hasted  not  to  go  down  about  a  whole  day." 
Hezekiah  has  a  boil,   which,   at  the  recommendation  of  the 
prophet  Isaiah,  is  subdued  with  a  lump  of  figs.     Still  the  king 
is  ill,  and  anxious  for  some  sign  by  which  he  may  know  that 
he  will  be  well  enough  to  attend  the  temple  in  three  days. 
Isaiah  promises  that  God  shall  alter  the  measure  of  time  on  the 
dial  by  ten  degrees,  giving  Hezekiah  the  choice  whether  time 
shall  be  advanced,  or  put  back,  to  that  limit.     Hezekiah  thinks 
little  of  time  being  advanced,  and  therefore  chooses  that  it 
should  be  made  to  retrograde,  which  is  accordingly  efiected. 
At  a  great  feast,  Belshazzar,  the  king  of  Babylon,  suddenly 
sees  the  fingers  of  a  hand  writing  some  mysterious  characters 
•'*  over  against  the  candlestick  upon  the  plaster  of  the  wall " 
of  his  palace.      He  and  his  lords  are  much  troubled  at  the 
sight.      Daniel  is  called  in,  and  interprets  the  writing  to  mean 
that  the  king's  rule  is  to  be  overthrown,   and  his  kingdom 
divided  between  the  Modes  and  Persians.     Wise  men,  at  the 
birth  of  Jesus,  are  guided  by  a  star  to  Jerusalem.      In  some 
way  that  is  not  explained,  they  are  aware  that  the  phenomenon 
is  sent  to  lead  them  to  one  who  was  born  king  of  the  Jews,  to 
whom  they  are  to  pay  their  respects.     At  Jerusalem  they  lose 
sight  of  the  star,  and   therefore  make  inquiry  for  the  future 
king,  throwing  the  whole  city,  including  the  existing  king, 
Herod,  into  commotion.      Herod  understands  that  the  child  so 
announced  is  the  Christ,  and  directs  the  wise  men  to  look  for 
him  in  Bethlehem,  where  the  Christ,  according  to  prediction, 
was  to  be  born.     The  wise  men  set  out,  and  "lo,  the  star, 
which  they  saw  in  the  east,  went  before  them,  till  it  came  and 
stood  over  where  the  young  child  was."     The  wise  men  tlius 
find  the  infant,  and  present  to  him  their  offerings.      Enoch  is 
taken  up,  bodily,  alive,  to   heaven  ;   so  is  Elijah  ;  and   so   is 
Jesus   after  resuscitation  from  death.     Jesus  was    "driven" 
by  the  spirit  into  the  wilderness,  where  he  was  for  forty  days 
"  with  the  wild  beasts,"  and  without  food.      After  this  Satan 
appeared  to  him,  and  took  him,  and  placed  him  on  a  pinnacle 
of  the  temple,  asking  him  to  cast  himself  down  from  thence,  in 
order  to  prove  the  promise  of  God  that  he  should  be  borne  up 


76 


MIRACLES. 


MIRACLES. 


77 


1 

1 


Curing 
fever. 


by  angels  ;  and  he  also  took  him  up  into  ''  an  exceeding  high 
mountain,"  whence  he  "  showeth  him  all  the  kingdoms  of  the 
world,  and  the  glory  of  them,"  "in  a  moment  of  time,"  promis- 
ing to  confer  all  these  things  upon  him  if  he  would  fall  down 
and  worship  him.     After  baptizing  a  certain  eunuch,  ''the  spirit 
of  the  Lord  caught  away  Philip,  that  the  eunuch  saw  him  no 
more,"  and  then  "  Philip  was  found   at  Azotus."     Paul  was 
"caught  up  to  the  third  heaven,"  "into  paradise,"  but  "whether 
in  the  body,  or  whether  out  of  the  body,"  he  could  not  tell. 
Jesus  was  on  an  inland  sea  with  his  disciples  when  "  a  great 
tempest "  arose,  and  the  vessel  was  "  covered  with  the  waves," 
and  "  they  were  filled  with  water,  and  were  in  jeopardy."   Jesus 
was  at  this  time  asleep,  and  on  being  aroused  by  his  disciples 
he   "  rebuked  the  winds  and  the  seas,  and  there  was  a  great 
calm."     Jesus,  being  hungry,  was  disappointed  in  not  finding 
fruit  on  a  fig-tree  at  the  time  when  it  was  not  the  season  for 
figs,  whereon  he  "cursed"  the  tree,  saying,  "Let  no  fruit  grow 
on  thee  henceforward  for  ever,"  and   "presently  the  fig-tree 
withered  away."     At  the  feast  of  Pentecost  the   promise  of 
Jesus  to  send  the  Holy  Ghost  was  fulfilled.      The  disciples 
beintr  all  assembled,  there  comes  "  a  sound  from  heaven,  as  of 
a  rushing  mighty  wind,"  which  fills  the  house.     Then,  a^  it 
were,   "cloven  tongues,  like  as  of  fire,"  settle  upon  each  of 
them,  and  they  become  "  all  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  and 
began  to  speak  with  other  tongues,  as  the  Spirit  gave  them 
utterance."      These  disciples  were  Galileans,  an  ignorant  race, 
speaking  a  barbaric  form  of  Hebrew,  but  now  they  were  able 
to   make   themselves   intelligible  to  "  Parthians,  Medes,  and 
Elamites,  and  the  dwellers  in  Mesopotamia,  and  in  Judea,  and 
Cappadocia,  in  Pontus,  and  Asia,  Phrygia,  and  Pamphylia,  in 
Egypt,  and  in  the  parts  of  Libya  about  Gyrene,  and  strangers 
of  Rome,  Jews  and  proselytes,  Cretes,  and  Arabians,"  with  the 
same  fluency  and  accuracy,  as  if  of  these  various  nations  and 
tribes  themselves. 

There  is  a  large  class  of  cases  wherein  various  bodily  ail- 
ments were  cured  miraculously.  At  times  also  infirmities 
were  inflicted  miraculously  in  judgment. 

Jesus,  with  a  touch,  cured  Peter's  wife's  mother  of  fever ; 
and  by  a  word  drove  fever  from  the  son  of  a  certain  noble- 
man, without  even  seeing  him.      Paul,  by  laying  on  of  hands 


it 


J 


'« 


-palsy. 


and  prayer,  cured  the  father  of  Publius  of  a  fever  and  bloody 

flux. 

Jesus  cured  the  servant  of  a  centurion  of  palsy  with  a  word, 
without  seeing  him,  and  restored  another  who  was  brought  to 
him  quite  prostrate  with  this  malady,  telling  him  to  "  Arise, 
take  up  his  bed,  and  walk,"  which  he  forthwith  did.  Peter, 
in  the  name  of  Jesus,  said  to  a  man  who  "  had  kept  his  bed 
eight  years  sick  of  the  palsy,"  "Arise,  and  make  thy  bed.  And 
he  arose  immediately." 

God,  after  enabUng  Moses  to  convert  his  rod  into  a  serpent,    -leprosy. 
and  the  serpent  back  again  into  the  rod,  to  show  what  more 
he  could  do,  told  him  to  put  his  hand  into  his  bosom,  and  on 
taking  it  out,  he  found  it  "  leprous  as  snow."     After  this,  God 
told  him  to  put  his  hand  again  into  his  bosom,  and  on  taking 
it  out,  "  it  was  turned  again  as  his  other  flesh."    Moses's  sister 
Miriam  was  dealt  with  in  the  same  way,  but  in  judgment.    She 
was  struck  with  leprosy;  but,  at  the  intercession  of  Moses,  was 
restored.     Naaman,  the  Syrian,  was  a  leper.     At  the  command 
of  Elisha  he  "dipped  himself  seven  times  in  Jordan,"  and  "his 
flesh  came  again  like  unto  the  flesh  of  a  little  child,  and  he  was 
clean."     Gehazi,  the  prophet's  servant,  covertly  received  from 
him  a  present  in  the  name  of  his  master,  and  the  prophet, 
miraculously  knowing  ttiereof,  passed  sentence  on  him,  saying, 
"  The  leprosy  of  Naaman  shall  cleave  unto  thee,  and  unto  thy 
seed  for  aver,"  upon  which  "  he  went  out  from  his  presence  a 
leper  as  white  as  snow."    A  "  man  of  God"  denounced  an  altar 
on  which  King  Jeroboam  was  offering  incense.     The  king  put 
out  his  hand  to  lay  hold  of  him,  when  it  "  dried  up,  so  that  he 
could  not  pull  it  in  again."     XJzziah,  for  invading  the  priestly 
office,  was  struck  with  leprosy,  and,  though  a  king,  was  thrust 
out  of  the  presence  of  those  he  was  with.     Jesus  cured  a  leper 
with  a  touch.      Ten  lepers  came  to  him,  and  on  his  telling 
them,  while  standing  "  afar  off,"  shouting  to  him,  to  go  and 
show  themselves  to  the  priests,  "  it  came  to  pass  that,  as  they 
went,  they  were  cleansed." 

Some  men  of  Sodom  were  struck  blind  by  the  angels  who  -Hind- 
went  th'ere  to  visit  Lot.     The  Syrians  lay  in  ambush  for  the' """ 
Israelites,  but  the  snare  repeatedly  failed  of  effect  through  the 
intervention  of  the  prophet  Elisha.     The  king  of  Syria  sur- 
rounded a  city  where  Elisha  was  with  "  horses,  chariots,  and  a 


ness. 


%■ 


78 


MIRACLES. 


MIRACLES. 


79 


— dumb- 
ness. 


great  host."     At  the  prayer  of  Elisha  these  were  all  struck 
blind.      Elisha  professed  to  guide  them  to  the  city,  where  the 
man  they  were  in  search  of  (namely  himself)  was,  and  so  con- 
ducted them  to  Samaria,  to  the  capital  of  the  king  of  Israel, 
where  they  were  made  captive.  The  king  of  Israel  wished  to  put 
them  to  the  sword,  hut  Elisha  prohibited  this,  had  the  captives 
fed,  and  then  allowed  them  to  return  to  their  master.     On  one 
occasion  two  bhnd  men  followed  Jesus,  imploring  his  help.    He 
touched  their  eyes,  which  then  "  were  opened."      On  another 
occasion  two  blind  men  sitting  by  the  wayside  called  to  him, 
and  he  touched  their  eyes,  "  and  immediately  their  eyes  re- 
ceived  sight."     A  blind  man  was  brought  to  him.      Jesus  led 
him  out  of  the  town  and  spat  on  his  eyes,  and  asked  him  what 
he  saw,  to  which  he  replied,  '*  I  see  men  as  trees  walking." 
Then  he  put  his  hands  upon  his  eyes,  and  told  him  to  look  up, 
when  *'  he  was  restored,  and  saw  every  man  clearly."     Jesus 
saw  a  man  who  had  been  blind  from  his  birth.      He  spat  on 
the  ground,  made  clay  with  the  spittle,  and  anointed  his  eyes 
therewith,  and  sent  him  to  "wash  in  the  pool  of  Siloam," 
after  which  he  came  back  seeing.     Paul  was  struck  blind  for 
three    days   by   a  heavenly   vision.      The   Lord,   in  a  vision, 
directed  one  Ananias  to  go  to  him,  telling  him  that  Paul,  in  a 
vision,  had  seen  him  coming  to  him,  and  restoring  his  sight. 
Ananias  accordingly  went,  and  put  his  hands  on  him,  when 
*'  immediately  there  fell  from  his  eyes,  as  it  had  been  scales, 
and  he  received  sight  forthwith,  and  arose,  and  was  baptized." 
Ely  mas,  described  as  a  sorcerer,  in  some  way  withstood  Bar- 
nabas and  Paul.      Paul,  being  "  filled   with  the  Holy  Ghost," 
in  the  name  of  the  Lord,  condemned  him  to  blindness  for  a 
season.      "  And  immediately  there  fell  on  him  a  mist  and  a 
darkness ;  and  he  went  about  seeking  some  to  lead  him  by  the 
hand." 

There  were  an  aged  couple,  Zacharias  and  his  wife,  who 
were  childless.  An  angel  appeared  to  Zacharias  and  assured 
him  that  his  prayers  had  been  heard,  and  that  his  wife  should 
bear  him  a  son,  whose  name  he  required  should  be  John. 
Zacharias  hesitated  to  believe  the  good  news,  when  the  angel, 
who  was  called  Gabriel,  struck  him  with  dumbness,  which  lasted 
till  the  son  was  born,  and  then  his  power  of  speech  returned  to 
him  directly  he  had  written  down  that  the  boy's  name  was  to  be 


\ 


John.      "  A  dumb  man  possessed  with  a  devil  "  was  brought 
to  Jesus,  "  and  when  the  devil  was  cast  out,  the  dumb  spake." 
At  another  time,  "  was  brought  unto  him  one  possessed  with  a 
devil,  blind  and  dumb  ;  and  he  healed  him,  in  so  much  that  the 
blind  and  dumb  both  spake  and  saw."     A  man  came  to  him  and 
said,  "  Master,  I  have  brought  unto  thee  my  son,  which  hath  a 
dumb  spirit ;   and  wheresoever  he  taketh  him,  he  teareth  him  ; 
and    he  foameth   and    gnasheth   with   his  teeth,   and   pineth 
away  ;  and  I  spake  to  thy  disciples  that  they  should  cast  him 
out,  and  they  could   not."      The  sufferer  was  then   brought  to 
Jesus  ;  "  and  when   he  saw  him,  straightway  the   spirit  tare 
him,   and    he    feU    on    the    ground,    and    wallowed   foaming. 
Jesus  rebuked  the  foul  spirit,  saying  unto  him.  Thou  dumb 
and  deaf  spirit,  I  charge  thee,  come  out  of  him,  and  enter  no 
more  unto  him.      And  the  spirit  cried,  and  rent  him  sore,  and 
came  out  of  him ;   and  he  was  as  one  dead,  in  so  much  that 
many  said.  He  is  dead."     The  disciples  asked  Jesus  "  privately" 
how  it  was   that  they  could    not  cast  him  out,  when  he   ex- 
plained, ^'This  kind  can  come  forth  by  nothing  but  by  prayer 
and  fasting."     A  man   deaf,  and  with  an  impediment  in   his 
speech,  was  brought   to  Jesus.     He  put  his   fingers  into  his 
ears,  and  spat,  and  touched  his   tongue,  and  then,  looking  up 
to   heaven  and    sighing,    he   said,    "  Be   opened  ; "  on  which 
hearing  and  freedom  of  speech  were  given  to  him. 

When   Jesus  was  arrested,   Peter  struck  at  the  servant  of  — maim- 
the  high  priest  with  his  sword,  "  and  cut  off  his  right  ear ;  "  ™^" 
on  which  Jesus  "  touched  his  ear,  and  healed  him."     Whether 
this  was  by  causing  a  new  ear  to  replace  the   one  cut  off,  or 
how  the  remedy  was  effected,  the   narrative   does  not   make 
clear. 

Peter  met  with  a  man  who  was  "  lame  from  his  mother's  —lame- 
womb,"  and  unable  to  walk.  Invoking  the  name  of  Jesus,  he 
bid  him  "  rise  up  and  walk,  "  and  giving  him  his  hand,  "  im- 
mediately his  feet  and  ancle  bones  received  strength.  And 
he,  leaping  up,  stood  and  walked,  and  entered  with  them  into 
the  temple,  walking,  and  leaping,  and  praising  God." 

Som6   examples   of   ejecting   evil  spirits   have  been  given  Casting 
when  Jesus  dealt  with  the   bhnd,  deaf,  and  dumb  ;  and  other  gp^^J!^ 
instances  are  numerous.      Jesus  was  met  by  two  men  "  pos- 
sessed with  devils,  coming  out  of  the  tombs,  exceeding  fierce, 


80 


MIRACLES. 


MIRACLES. 


81 


Raising  the 
dead. 


SO  that  no  man  might  pass  by  that  way."     The  devils  knew 
him  as  the  Son  of  God,  and  asked  if  he  had  come     to  torment 
them  before   the  time."       There   were   about  two   thousand 
swine  feeding  there,  and  the  devils  a.ked  permission  to  enter 
them,  if  to  be  ejected  from  the  men.     This  wa^  allowed  ;  they 
entered  the   swine,  and,   "  behold,  the   whole  herd  of  swine 
ran  violently  down  a  steep  place  into  the  sea,  and  perished  m 
the  waters."     A  woman  of  Canaan  asked  Jesus  to  re  leve  her 
daughter,   who  was    "grievously  vexed   with  a  devi .        ±le 
objected  to  help  her,  as  she  was  not  an  Israelite  ;  but  on  her 
renewing  her  solicitations,  he  acted,  without  seeing  the  daughter, 
who  ''was  made  whole  from  that  very  hour."     There  was  a 
man  in  the  synagogue  ''  with  an   unclean  spirit.'      Jesus   bid 
him  "  come  out  of  him,"  whereupon,  "  when  the  unclean  spirit 
had  torn  him,  and  cried  with  a  loud  voice,  he  came  out  of  him. 
There  were  ''  certain  women  which  had  been  healed  ot  evil 
spirits  and  infirmities,"  and  among  them  was   "  Mary,  called 
Ma-dalene,  out  of  whom  went  seven  devils."      "  There  was  a 
woman  which  had  a  spirit  of  infirmity  eighteen  years,  and  was 
bound  together,  and  could    in  no  wise  lift  up  herself.       Jesus 
-  laid  his  hands  on  her,  and  immediately  she  was  made  straight 
Some  one,  who  was  not  a  follower  of  Jesus,  had  been  observed 
casting  out  devils  in   his  name  ;   and   on   bemg  told  of  this 
Jesus  tolerated   the  act.     After  the  death  of  Jesus  Paul   met 
with  "  a  certain  damsel  possessed  with  a  spirit  of  divination. 
He  commanded  the  spirit  to  come  out  of  her,  and  it  did  so 

Even  the  dead  were  raised  to   life.     The  son  of  the  widow 
who  had  supported  Elijah  with  the   inexhaustible   meal   and 
oil    fell  ill  and   died.      Elijah   "  stretched   himself  upon  the 
child  three  times,"  and  cried  unto  God,  saying,  "  I  pray  thee 
let  this  child's  soul  come  into  him  again  ;  "  and  this  was  done, 
-  and  he  came  to  life."     A  certain  Shunamite  woman  made  a 
lodcrinc  on   her  premises   for  Elisha,  to   be  occupied  by  him 
when  he  passed  that  way.     She  was  old  and  childless,  but  out 
of  gratitude  the  prophet  promised  that  she  should  have  a  child, 
which  accordingly  was  born.     The  child,  however  died       The 
woman  hastened  to  the  prophet  and  laid  hold  of  his  feet      The 
prophet's  servant  wished  to  thrust  her  away,  but  he  told  him 
U>  leave  her  alone,   saying   she  was   evidently  vexed  about 
something,  ''  and  the  Lord  had  hid  it  from  him,  and  had  not 


told    him."       Elisha    despatched    his   servant  as  speedily   as 
possible  with  his  staff,  directing  him  to  lay  it  "  upon  the  face 
of  the  child."     No  results,  however,  followed.      The   prophet 
himself  arrived,  and,  "  behold,  the   child  was   dead,  and   laid 
upon  his  bed."     Elisha  entered  the  room  with  his  servant,  and 
closed  the  door.      He  then  prayed  to  God,  and  laid  upon  the 
child,  and  he  ''  put  his  mouth  upon   his  mouth,  and  his  eyes 
upon  his  eyes,  and  his  hands  upon  his  hands  ;  and  he  stretched 
himself  upon  the  child,  and  the  flesh  of  the  child  waxed  warm." 
This  process  he  renewed,  after  which  "  the  child  sneezed  seven 
times,  and  the  child  opened  his  eyes."      One  of  the  rulers  of 
the  synagogue  came  to  Jesus  and  said,  "  My  daughter  is  even 
now  dead  ;  but   come   and  lay  thy  hand   upon   her,   and  she 
shall  live."     Jesus,  accordingly,  went  to  his  house,  and  **put 
them   all  out,  and  took  her  by  the  hand,  and  called,  saying, 
Maid,   arise.       And    her   spirit    came    again,    and    she   arose 
straightway."     The   only  son   of  a  widow  of  Nain  died.     As 
the  corpse  was  being  carried    by,  Jesus  stopped  the   bier,  and 
said,  ''  Young  man,  I  say  unto  thee,  arise.      And  he  that  was 
dead  sat  up,  and  began  to  speak."     Lazarus,  a  friend  of  Jesus, 
was  very  ill,  and  his  sisters  urgently  sent  for  him.      He   pur- 
posely remained  where   he  was   till  the  sick   man  was  dead. 
Then   after  he   had   been  four  days  dead,  and  the    body  was 
decomposing,   he    went  to  the   sepulchre,  and   "  cried  with   a 
loud  voice,  Lazarus,  come  forth.      And  he  that  was  dead  came 
forth,  bound  hand  and  foot  with  grave-clothes."     One  Dorcas, 
a  benevolent  woman,  died.      Peter  went  to   the   room  where 
she  was  laid  out,  and  ''put  them  all  forth,  and  kneeled  down 
and  prayed  ;    and    turning   him  to  the   body,    said,   Tabitha, 
arise.      And   she  opened   her  eyes  ;  and  when  she  saw  Peter, 
she  sat  up."      While  Paul  was  preaching  in  an  upper  chamber 
for  a  considerable  time,  a  young  man  named  Eutychus  "  sunk 
down  with  sleep,  and  fell  down  from  the  third   loft,  and  was 
taken  up   dead."      Paul  went  down,  threw  himself  upon  him, 
and  then  said,  "  Trouble  not  yourselves,  for  his  life  is  in  him." 
The  young  man  then  returned  to  the  upper  room,  took   food, 
and  contiliued   talking  with   them,  "  even  till   break  of  day." 
On  the  other  hand,  at  a  time  when  the  disciples  of  Jesus  had 
all  things  in    common,  one    Ananias,  with  his   wife    Sapphira, 
sold  a  possession,  and  kept  back  part  of  the  proceeds  from  the 


ii  |a 


82 


MIRACLES. 


public  purse.  On  Anauias  laying  down  the  other  part  at  the 
apostle's  feet,  Peter,  having  miraculous  knowledge  of  what  he 
had  done,  accused  Ananias  of  \jing  "  to  the  Holy  Ghost ;  "  and 
directly  his  guilt  was  thus  proclaimed,  Ananias  "  fell  down, 
and  gave  up  the  ghost."  The  wife  came  in,  and  Peter  tested 
her  by  asking  her  for  what  the  land  had  been  sold  ;  and  on 
her  o-iving  a  false  reply,  he  intimated  to  her  that  she  was  to 
be  carried  out  as  her  husband  had  just  been.  On  this  she 
"  fell  down  straightway  at  his  feet,  and  yielded  up  the  ghost." 
Healing  Besides  the  particular  instances  given,   multitudes,  when- 

muititudes.  ^^qj.  ^]^qj  presented  themselves,  were  healed  by  Jesus  and  his 
disciples.      *'  Jesus  went  about  all  Galilee,  healing  all  manner 
of  sickness  and  all  manner  of  disease  among  the  people.     And 
his  fame  went  through  all  Syria  ;  and  they  brought  unto  him 
all  sick  people  that  were  taken  with  divers  diseases  and  tor- 
ments, and  those  which  were  possessed  with  devils,  and  those 
which  were  lunatick,  and   those  that  had   the  palsy  ;  and   he 
healed   them."     "  And  Jesus  went   about   all   the   cities  and 
villages  healing  every  sickness  and   every  disease   among  the 
people."      "  And  great  multitudes  came  unto  him,  having  with 
them  those  that  were   lame,  blind,  dumb,  maimed,  and   many 
others,  and   cast  them   down  at   Jesus'  feet  ;  and  he   healed 
them."      So  that  when  the  Baptist  sent  two  of  his  disciples  to 
him  to  exhibit  his  credentials,  he  appealed  to  these  manifesta- 
tions.    "  Go,"  he   said,  "  and   show  John  again   those  things 
which  ye  do  hear  and  see  ;   the  blind  receive  their  sight,  and 
the  lame  walk,  the  lepers  are  cleansed,  and  the  deaf  hear,  the 
dead  are   raised    up."     And    he  gave  the  same   power  to  his 
disciples.      On  one   occasion  he  sent  the   twelve  apostles   out 
to  preach,  and  then  said  to  them,  "  Heal  the  sick,  cleanse  the 
lepers,  raise  the  dead,  cast  out  devils  ;  freely  ye  have  received, 
freely  give."     And  he  thus  appointed  other  seventy  also,  ''  to 
go  forth,  two  and  two,  before  his  face  into  every  city  and  place, 
whither  he  himself  would  come  ;  "  and  these  he  commissioned, 
in  every  city  they  entered,  to  "  heal  the  sick  that  are  therein." 
These  persons  were  surprised  at  the  proofs  of  the  power  com- 
mitted to  them,  and  "  returned  again  with  joy,  saying.  Lord, 
even  the  devils  are  subject  unto  us  through  thy  name." 
Miracles  Inanimate   substances,   connected   with   those  who  worked 

^X  mani-  Hiiracles,  had  in  themselves  restorative  power.      "  And  it  came 


MIRACLES. 


83 


to  pass,  as  they  were  burying  a  man,  that,  behold,  they  spied 
a  band  of  men  ;  and  they  cast  the  man  into  the  sepulchre  of 
Elisha  :  and  when  the  man  was  let  down,  and  touched  the 
bones  of  Elisha,  he  revived,  and  stood  up  on  his  feet."  ''  A 
certain  woman  which  had  an  issue  of  blood  twelve  years,"  and 
was  hopelessly  incurable,  "  when  she  heard  of  Jesus,  came  in 
the  press  behind,  and  touched  his  garment.  For,  she  said,  if 
I  may  touch  but  his  clothes,  I  shall  be  well.  And  straight- 
way the  fountain  of  her  blood  was  dried  up,  and  she  felt  in 
her  body  that  she  was  healed  of  that  plague."  Jesus  was 
sensible  at  the  time  "  that  virtue  had  gone  out  of  him." 
When  he  landed  on  the  shore  of  lake  Gennesaret,  the  people, 
knowing  him,  "  ran  through  that  whole  region  round  about, 
and  beg-an  to  carry  about  in  beds  those  that  were  sick,  where 
they  heard  he  was.  And  whithersover  he  entered,  into 
villages,  or  cities,  or  country,  they  laid  the  sick  in  the  streets, 
and  besought  him  that  they  might  touch  if  it  were  but  the 
border  of  his  garment ;  and  as  many  as  touched  him  were 
made  whole."  "  And  by  the  hands  of  the  apostles,"  after  the 
death  of  Jesus,  "  were  many  signs  and  wonders  wrought  among 
the  people  ;  in  so  much  that  they  brought  forth  the  sick  into 
the  streets,  and  laid  them  on  beds  and  couches,  that  at  the 
least  the  shadow  of  Peter  passing  by  might  overshadow  some 
of  them."  "  And  God  wrought  special  miracles  by  the  hands 
of  Paul  ;  so  that  from  his  body  were  brought  unto  the  sick 
handkerchiefs  or  aprons,  and  the  diseases  departed  from  them, 
and  the  evil  spirits  went  out  of  them.'* 

The  possession  of  miraculous  power  was,  in  effect,  bound  up 
with  the  faith  in  Jesus  ;  and  his  followers  were  promised  the 
same,  or  even  greater  power,  than  he  had  exhibited. 

There  are  other  manifestations  of  a  miraculous  nature.  The 
Urim  and  Thummim  were  some  mysterious  objects,  which  are 
nowhere  described,  that  were  worn  by  the  high  priest  on  his 
breast  (Ex.  xxviii.  30  ;  Lev.  viii.  8),  and  by  means  of  which,  in 
some  manner  not  stated,  he  obtained  counsel  of  God,  whereby 
to  direct  the  movements  of  the  Israelites  (Num.  xxvii.  21  ; 
Deut.  xxxiii.  8).  In  the  time  of  Saul  these  engines  we  learn ' 
were  inoperative,  God  refusing  to  answer  him  thereby  (1  Sam. 
xxviii.  6).  When  the  Israelites  returned  out  of  the  Babylonish 
capitivity  they  were  without  them,  but  had  a  hope,  from  what 


mate  sub- 
stances. 


Inqxiiring 
of  God  by 
Urim, 
Thummim, 
kc. 


I 


— by  pro- 
phets- 


84. 


MIRACLES. 


direction  it  is  not  explained,  of  being  supplied  therewith  again 
(Ezra  ii.  68).      The  mercy  seat  between  the  ohenlbims  on  the 
ark  w^as  God's  appointed   place  for  "  coininunini:  with    Moses" 
(Ex.  XXV.  22),  and  thither  the  Israelites  Avent  in  the  times  of 
the  judges    to  ''enquire   of  the   Lord"    (Jud.    xx.    27).       In 
Saul's  time  this  was  not  practised  (1  Chron.  xiii.  3).      The  altar 
was  also  resorted  to  for  a   like   purpose.      David  wished  "  to 
enquire  of  God"  there  on   one   occasion,  but  was  afraid  to  do 
so  from  the  presence  of  an  angel  with  a  sword  (I  Chron.  xxi. 
30).     Ahaz  thus  applied  for  information.     "  The  brazen  altar," 
he  said,  "shall  be  for  me  to  enquire  by"  (2  Kings  xvi.  15). 
The  ephod,  which  w\as  a  priestly  garment,   was  also  used   by 
David  for  the  same  purpose  when  he  wished  to  know  from  God 
whether  he  should  pursue  the  Amalekites  (1  Sam.  xxx.  7,  8). 
Prophets  were,  however,  the  ordinary  channel  of  communi- 
cation wdth  God.       Moses    acted    in    such    capacity.       "  The 
people,"  he  said,  "  come  unto  me  to  enquire  of  God  :  when 
they  have  a  matter,  they  come  unto  me"  (Ex.  xviii.  15,  IG). 
The  subject  of  their  warfares  was  one  on  which  they  commonly 
sou<yht  such  direction.     David,  having  personal  access  to  God, 
apparently  either  as  a  prophet  or  a  kingly  priest,  "  enquired 
of  the  Lord,  saying,  shall  I  go  and  smite  these  PhiHstines." 
He   received   an  encouraging  answer,   but   his   people    being 
nevertheless  apprehensive  as  to  results,  he  "  enquired  of  the 
Lord  yet  again,"  and  being  promised  success,  the  expedition 
was  carried  out  triumphantly  (1  Sam.  xxiii.  1-5).      At  another 
time  "  David  enquired   of  the   Lord,  saying,  shall  I  go  up  to 
the  Philistines."      He  was  told  he  might  do  so,  and  he  de- 
feated them.      The  enemy,  however,  rallied,  on  which  "  David 
enquired  of  the  Lord"  how  he  was  to  proceed,  and  was  told, 
''  Thou  shalt  not  go  up  ;  but  fetch   a  compass  behind  them, 
and  come  upon  them  over  against  the  mulberry  trees,"  taking 
which    course   he    again  defeated   them    (2    Sam.   v.    19-25). 
Ahab,    king  of  Israel,  wished   to  recover  Ramoth-gilead    from 
the  Syrians,  and  induced  Jehoshaphat,  king  of  Judah,  to  join 
him  in  the  enterprise.    Jehoshaphat  begged  that  the  Lord  might 
be  enquired  of,  on  which  Ahab  assembled  four  hundred  pro- 
phets who  promised  success.      Jehoshaphat,  still  not  satisfied, 
asked  if  there  was  not  yet  another  prophet.      Ahab  said  there 
was  one  Micaiah,  but  from  whom  no  good  was  to  be  expected,  as 
he  hated  him.  Still  Jehoshaphat  wished  Micaiah  to  be  employed. 


MIRACLES. 


85 


Ahab  reluctantly  consented.      Micaiah  was  asked,  "  Shall  we 
go  against  Ramoth-gilead  to  battle,  or  shall  we  forbear?"  and  his 
answer  was,  "Go,  and  prosper;  for  the  Lord  shall  deliver  it  into 
the  hand  of  the  king."    Ahab,  unaccustomed  to  receive  pleasant 
intelligence  from  Micaiah, entreated  him  to  say  "nothing  but  that 
which  is  true  in  the  name  of  the  Lord."     On  this  Micaiah  indi- 
cated that  the  people  would  be  dispersed,  with  the  loss  of  their 
leader,  and  then  he  disclosed  a  wonderful  scene.      "  I  saw,"  he 
declared,  "  the  Lord  sitting  on  his  throne,  and  all  the  host  of 
heaven  standing  by  him   on  his   right  hand  and   on   his  left. 
And  the  Lord  said,  who  shall  persuade  Ahab,  that  he  may  go 
up  and  fall  at  Ramoth-gilead  ?     And  one  said  on  this  manner, 
and  another  said   on   that  manner.      And  there  came  forth  a 
spirit,  and  stood  before   the   Lord,  and  said,  I   will   persuade 
him.      And  the  Lord  said,  Wherewith  ?     And  he  said,  I  will 
go  forth   and   I  will  be  a  lying  spirit  in  the  mouth  of  all  his 
prophets.      And  he  said.  Thou  shalt  persuade  him,  and  prevail 
also  :  go  forth  and   do  so.      Now,  therefore,"  added  Micaiah, 
"  behold  the  Lord  hath  put  a  lying   spirit  in  the  mouth  of  all 
these  thy  prophets,  and  the  Lord  hath   spoken  evil  concerning 
thee."       Ahab  became  incensed,   and  committed    Micaiah    to 
prison.      The  two   kings   then  went   forth   to   battle   and  w^ere 
defeated,   Ahab   being  killed   (1    Kings   xxii.    1-37).       King 
Zedekiah   being  threatened  by    the  king  of  Babylon,    asked 
Jeremiah  to  enquire  of  the  Lord  for  him.     Jeremiah  announced 
in  reply  dreadful  calamities  (Jer.  xxi.  1-10).     Zedekiah  again 
resorted  to   Jeremiah,  who  told  him  that  on  the  withdravyal  of 
the  king  of  Egypt,  who  had  come  to  defend  Jerusalem,  the 
Babylonians   would   return   and   destroy  the  city  (Jer.  xxxvii. 
3-8).      The  united  forces  of  Judah,  Israel,  and  Edom,  in  cross- 
ing a  desert  to  attack  the  Moabites,  were  in  great  straits  for 
want  of   water.       The   king   of  Judah   asked   for   a  prophet, 
through  whom  inquiry  of  the  Lord   might   be  made.       Elisha 
was  produced,  and  he  obtained  for   them  a  miraculous  supply 
(2  Kings  iii.  5-20). 

These  inquiries  of  God  were  also  made  on  all  sorts  of  occa- 
sions. After  the  death  of  Saul,  David,  who  was  still  not  fully 
established  on  the  throne,  asked,  "Shall  I  go  up  into  any  of  the 
cities  of  Judah  ?  And  the  Lord  said  to  him.  Go  up.  And  David 
said,  whither  shall  I  go  up?  And  he  said,  unto  Hebron"  (2  Sam. 
ii.  1).    At  another  time  he  asked,  why  they  were  afflicted  with  a 


MIRACLES. 


87 


86 


MIRACLES. 


Answers 
from  God 
refused. 


famine.      *'  And  the  Lord  answered,  It  is  for  Saul,  and  for  his 
bloody  house,  because  he  slew  the  Gibeonites."     On  this  David 
gave  up  seven  of  Saul's  grandsons  to  the  Gibeonites  for  execution, 
or  rather  sacrifice,  "and  they  hanged  them  in  the  hill  before  the 
Lord."    The  bones  of  the  victims,  together  with  those  of  Saul  and 
Jonathan,  were  then  buried,    ''And   after  that   God  was  en- 
treated for  the  land"   (2   Sam.    xxi.    1 — 14.)      The  king   of 
Syria   being  ill,  sent  one  of  his  retainers  named  Hazael  to 
Elisha  to  inquire   of  the  Lord  by  him   "whether  he  should 
recover  of  this  disease."     Elisha  s  answer  was  mysterious.      He 
said,  "  Go,  say  unto  him.  Thou  mayst  certainly  recover :    how- 
beit  the  Lord  hath  showed   me  that  he  shall  surely  die."      He 
then  looked  stedfastly  at  Hazael  and  wept,  explaining  that  he 
foresaw  how  he  would   oppress   the    Israelites.       Hazael  was 
amazed  to  hear  that  he    should  be  in  a  position  to  exercise 
such   power,  on  which  the  prophet  further  explained,    "  The 
Lord   hath    showed  me  that  thou    shalt  be  king  over  Syria." 
On  this  Hazael  went  to  his  master  and  told  him  that  the  pro- 
phet had  said  he  was  to  recover,  and  the  following  morning  he 
smothered  him  with   a  wet  cloth,  and  "  reigned  in  his  stead  " 
(2  Kings  viii.  7-15).     When  the  Book  of  the  Law,  discovered 
by  Hilkiah,  was  brought  to  king  Josiah,  he  sent  Hilkiah  and 
the  others  to  "  enquire  of  the  Lord  "  for  him   "  concerning  the 
words  of  this  book  that  is  found,"  and  they  applied  to  "  Hul- 
dah  the  proplietess,"  wife  of  the  "  keeper  of  the  wardrobe," 
who  told  them  what  was  to  ensue  pursuant  to  the  predictions 
in  the  book  (2  Kings  xxii,  11-20.) 

Wlien  the  people  were  given  up  to  idolatries,  God  refused 
to  lend  himself  to  their  inquiries.  "  Should  I,"  he  says,  "  be 
enquired  of  at  all  by  them  ?  Every  man  of  the  house  of 
Israel  that  setteth  up  his  idols  in  his  heart,  and  putteth  the 
stumbling-block  of  his  iniquity  before  his  face,  and  cometh  to 
the  prophet ;  I  the  Lord  will  answer  him  that  cometh  accord- 
ing to  the  multitude  of  his  idols.  I  the  Lord  will  answer  him 
by  myself."  "  Are  ye  come  to  enquire  of  me  ?  As  I  live, 
saith  the  Lord  God,  I  will  not  be  enquired  of  by  you"  (Ezek. 
xiv.  3-7;  XX.  3,  31.)  Saul  had  "enquired  of  the  Lord," 
and  when  "  the  Lord  answered  him  not,  neither  by  dreams, 
nor  by  XJrim,  nor  by  prophets,"  he  had  recourse  to  a  woman 
who  had   "  a  familiar  spirit,"  and  she  called  up  the  departed 


■■ 


spirit  of  Samuel,  from  whom  he  learnt  his  fate.  And  because 
he  had  taken  this  course,  and  "  enquired  not  of  the  Lord ; 
therefore  he  slew  him,  and  turned  the  kingdom  unto  David 
the  son  of  Jesse  "   (1  Sam.  xxviii.  6-20;    1  Chron.  x.  14.) 

The  early  patriarchs,  Adam,  Noah,   Abraham,  Isaac,   and  ^j^^*^^. 
Jacob,  had  familiar  speech  with  God.      Even  their  wives  could  caUon  with 
directly  communicate  with  him.     Eve  personally  defended  her- 
self when  God  accused  her  of  disobedience.      Sarah  did  so,  by 
a  prevarication,  when  God  had  observed  her  laughing  at  the 
idea  his  promise  had  conveyed  to  her,  that  in  her  old  age  she 
should  have  a  child  ;  and  Rebekah  questioned  God  about  her 
own  condition,  and  received  the  reply  that  she  would  bear  twins. 
"  Two  nations,"  she  was  told,  "  are  in  thy  womb."      Even  the 
wicked  Cain  had  this  personal  access  to  God,  and  was  able  to 
secure  from  him  exemption  from  the  penalty  for  his  crime.      In 
later  times  Moses  had  constant  intercourse  with  God  in  a  most 
unceremonial  manner.     ''  The  Lord  spake  unto  Moses  face  to 
face,  as  a  man  speaketh  unto  his  friend"  (Ex.  xxxiii.  11),  con- 
versing with  him  "mouth  to  mouth"  (Num.  xii.  8).     There  is 
also  an  instance  where,  apparently,  the  Israelites  were  admitted 
to  communicate  with  God  in  an  informal  and  direct  manner, 
without  any  medium.     Saul  had  been  chosen  king  by  lot,  but 
*'  when  they  sought  him  he  could  not  be  found.     Therefore 
they  inquired  of  the  Lord  further  if  the  man  should  yet  come 
thither.     And  the  Lord  answered,  Behold,  he  hath  hid  himself 
among  the  stuff"  (1  Sam.  x.  21,  22).  ^ 

Then  there  were  frequent  visitations  in  dreams.      This  is  ™i^^ 
described  to  be  an  appointed  method  of  communication  between  old  Testa- 
God  and  man.     "  God  speaketh  once,  yea  twice,  yet  man  per-  ^^nt. 
ceiveth  it  not.      In  a  dream,  in  a  vision  of  the  night,  when 
deep  sleep  falleth  upon  men,  in  slumberings  upon  the  bed  ; 
then  he  openeth  the  ears  of  men,  and  sealeth  their  instruction  " 
(Job   xxxiii.  14-16).     The  prophets  again  are  pointed  to  as 
the  approved  channels  for  such  intercourse.      "  If  there  be  a 
prophet  among  you,  I,  the  Lord,  will  make  myself  known  unto 
him  in  a  vision,  and  will  speak  unto  him  in  a  dream"  (Num. 
xii.-'G).      In  the  latter  days  the  capacity  was  to  be  largely 
extended,  and  the  promise  is  said  to  have  been  realized,  just 
after  the'death  of  Jesus,  among  his  followers.      "  This,"  it  is 
said,  "  is  that  which  was  spoken  by  the  prophet  Joel ;  and  it 


88 


MIRACLES. 


MFRACLES. 


89 


shall  come  to  pass  in  the  last  days,  saith  God,  I  will  pour  out 
of  my  Spirit  upon  all  flesh  :  and  your  sons  and  your  daughters 
shall  prophesy,  and  your  young  men  shall  see  visions,  and  your 
old  men  shall  dream  dreams  "  (Acts  ii.  16,  17).  But,  practi- 
cally, this  method  of  communication  was  resorted  to  without  the 
intervention  of  any  acknowledged  medium  such  as  a  prophet, 
and  took  effect  even  with  persons  not  worshipping  the  true 
God.  The  intercourse  was  thus  quite  informal  and  promiscuous. 
The  first  recorded  dream  is  that  of  Abimelech,  the  Philistine 
king  of  Gerar.  Imposed  upon  by  Abraham  into  thinking  that 
the  aged  Sarah  was  still  unmarried,  he  had  taken  possession  of 
her,  when  God  came  to  him  "  in  a  dream  by  night,  and  said  to 
him.  Behold  thou  art  but  a  dead  man,  for  the  woman  which 
thou  hast  taken  ;  for  she  is  a  man's  wife."  Abimelech  pro- 
tested his  innocence,  pleading  the  deception  put  upon  him,  and 
God,  in  reply,  absolved  him.  In  this  special  way  the  chastity 
of  Sarah  was  preserved  (Gen.  xx.  1-6).  The  dreamer  here  was 
a  heathen  king.  The  next  so  dealt  with  was  the  patriarch 
Jacob,  and  he  had  two  divine  dreams  of  a  very  dissimilar 
description.  The  first  was  of  heaven,  there  appearing  to  him 
a  ladder  of  immense  length  ''  set  up  on  earth,  and  the  top  of  it 
reached  to  heaven,"  and  up  and  down  this,  "  behold,  the  angels 
of  God  ascending  and  descending  on  it"  (Gen.  xxviii.  12).  His 
other  dream  was  altogether  of  earth,  earthy.  It  related  to  the 
procreation  of  cattle,  in  which  "  the  angel  of  God  "  spake  unto 
him  and  pointed  out  how  all  the  males  were  "  ringstraked, 
speckled,  and  grisled,"  a  revelation  which  put  into  his  head  a 
device  whereby  he  was  enabled  to  defraud  Laban  extensively  in 
the  partition  of  the  cattle  between  them  (Gen.  xxxi.  10-12). 
After  this,  Laban,  who  was  an  idolater,  is  visited  by  God  in  a 
dream,  and  warned  not  to  molest  Jacob,  who  was  decamping 
with  what  he  had  thus  appropriated  (Gen.  xxxi.  24).  Then 
follows  a  godly  dreamer,  namely  Joseph.  He  has  two  dreams, 
which  implied  that  his  father,  mother,  and  brethren  were  to 
render  him  obeisance  (Gen.  xxxvii.  6-10).  After  this,  the 
chief  butler  and  chief  baker  of  the  king  of  Egypt,  that  is 
idolaters,  are  visited  with  prophetic  dreams,  which  imported 
that  the  one  was  to  be  restored  to  favour,  and  the  other  hanged 
(Gen.  xl.  1-22).  King  Pharaoh,  also  an  idolater,  had  two 
prophetic  dreams,  both  indicating  the  same  events,  namely, 


11 


years  of  plenty  to  be  followed  by  years  of  famine  (Gen.  xli.  1- 
7).  A  Midianite  had  a  dream  about  a  cake  of  barley  over- 
throwing a  tent,  which  a  fellow  Midianite  was  empowered  to 
see  applied  to  a  particular  person,  namely  to  Gideon,  a  Jewish 
leader,  signifying  that  he  was  to  overthrow  their  host  (Jud. 
vii.  13,  14).  Then  we  pass  to  Solomon,  the  great  Jewish 
king,  to  whom  "  the  Lord  appeared  "  in  a  dream,  promising 
him  wisdom  and  riches  (1  King  iii.  5-15).  The  person  next 
visited  in  this  manner  was  the  idolatrous  king  Nebuchadnezzar. 
He  had  two  dreams,  one  relating  to  monarchies  extending  from 
his  time  to  the  end  of  all  things,  and  the  other  to  his  own 
temporary  downfall  and  degradation  to  the  condition  of  a  beast, 
when  he  "  was  driven  from  men,  and  he  did  eat  grass  as  oxen, 
and  his  body  was  wet  with  the  dew  of  heaven,  till  his  hairs 
were  grown  like  eagles'  feathers,  and  his  nails  like  birds'  claws" 
(Dan.^'ii.  31-45;  iv.  10-33).  The  prophet  Daniel  had  after- 
wards a  dream,  which  was  the  repetition  of  Nebuchadnezzar's 
first  dream,  but  with  different  imagery  (Dan.  vii.  2-14). 

These  are  the  dreams  of  the  Old  Testament.      In  the  New  visitation 
Testament  Joseph,  the  husband  of  Mary  the  mother  of  Jesus,   /g^  TeSa 
had  several  dreams.      He  had  married  Mary  as  a  maiden,  but  "^ent.      ^ 
found  her  to  be  with  child,   and  was  about  to  put  her  away, 
when  "  the  angel  of  the  Lord  appeared  unto  him  in  a  dream, 
saying,  Joseph,  thou  son  of  David,  fear  not  to  take  unto  thee 
Mary  thy  wife  :  for  that  which  is  conceived  in  her  is  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  "  (Matt.  i.  18-20).     Then  the  wise  men  from  the 
East  who  had  come  to  make  their  offerings  to  the  infant  Jesus 
were  ^'  warned  of  God  in  a  dream  "  not  to  *'  return  to  Herod," 
that  is   to   Jerusalem,   and  so  they  went  home  by  "  another 
way  "  (Matt.  ii.  1 2).      After  this  "  the  Lord  appeared  to  Joseph 
in  a  dream,"  warning  him  to  flee  with  his  family  from  Herod 
to  Egypt,  where  he  was  to  remain  until  God  should  "  bring 
him  word."      Accordingly,  "when  Herod  was  dead,  behold,  an 
angel  of  the  Lord  appeareth  in  a  dream  to  Joseph  in  Egypt,"  tell- 
ing him  of  the  event,  and  that  he  might  return  to  the  land  of 
Israel.      But  coming  there,  he  discovered  that  Herod's  son  was 
ruling^n  his  stead,  and  he  was  afraid  to  proceed,  on  which  God 
rectified  his  former  instructions  by  telling  him  in  a  dream  ^to 
"turn   aside  into  the   parts   of  Galilee"    (Matt.    ii.    13-22). 
Lastly,  we  have  a  heathen  female,  namely  Pilate's  wife,  suffer- 


L 


Tallacious 
dreams. 


Visions. 
Old  Testa- 
ment. 


90 


MIRACLES. 


ing  many  things  in  a  dream  connected  with  Jesus,  of  whose 
innocence  she  consequently  assured  her  husband  Pilate,  when 
seated  in  judgment  upon  him  (Matt,  xxvii.  19). 

But  there  was  a  liability  that  fallacious  dreams  should  be 
put  about.  "  If,"  according  to  the  rule  already  pointed  out, 
''  there  should  arise  a  prophet,  or  a  dreamer  of  dreams,"  who 
should  say,  ''  Let  us  go  after  other  gods,"  he  was  not  to  be  lis- 
tened to,  with  whatever  wonders  he  might  support  his  testi- 
mony (Deut.  xiii.  1-3).  And  "  false  prophets,"  who  might 
say,  "  I  have  dreamed,  I  have  dreamed,"  trying  to  make  God's 
people  "  forget  his  name  by  their  dreams,"  he  would  repudiate, 
saying,  "  I  sent  them  not,  nor  commanded  them  "  (Jer.  xxiii. 
25-32  ;  xxvii.  9,  10  ;  xxix.  8,  9  ;  Zech.  x.  2). 

From  dreams  we  pass  to  visions.      Here  the  prophets  were 
the   persons   particularly  favoured.      "If  there   be  a   prophet 
among  you,"  says  God,  "  I,  the  Lord,  will  make  myself  known 
unto  him  in  a  vision,  and  will  speak  unto  him  in  a  dream  " 
(Num.  xii.  6).     Accordingly,  various  prophetic  utterances   are 
ushered  in  as  imparted  in  visions.      There  is  the  ''  vision  of 
Isaiah,   the  son  of  Amoz,  which  he   saw  concerning  Judah  and 
Jerusalem,"  in  the  days  of  certain  kings  of  Judah  (Isa.  i.  1). 
"  A  grievous  vision  is  declared  "   unto  him  (Isa.  xxi.  2).      He 
speaks  also  of  "  The  burden  of  the  valley  of  vision  "  (Isa.  xxii. 
1).   There  is  "  The  vision  of  Obadiah  concerning  Edom"  (Obad. 
i.  1),  and    "  The  book  of  the  vision  of  Naham  the  Elkoshite," 
which  is  "The  burden  of  Nineveh"  (Nah.  i.  1).      "Write  the 
vision,"  Habakkuk  was  told,  "and  make  it  plain  upon  tables, 
that  he  may  run  that  readeth  it  "  (Hab.  ii.  2).      And  we  hear 
of  "  the  visions  of  Iddo  the  seer  against  Jeroboam  the  son  of 
Nebat"   (2  Chron.  ix.  29),  which  are  now  lost.     There  were 
also  special  visions.      "  The  word  of  the  Lord  came  unto  Abram 
in  a  vision,"  announcing  to  him  his  promised  seed  and  their 
possessions  (Gen.  xv.  1-21).      "And  God  spake  unto  Israel  in 
the  visions  of  the  night,  and  said  Jacob,  Jacob,  and  he  said, 
Here   am   I,"  and  then  God   encouraged  him  to  go  down  to 
Egypt   (Gen.  xlvi.    2-4).      Balaam,  who   was  an  idolater,  and 
given  to  the  employment  of  "  enchantments,"  received  an   im- 
portant manifestation.      "  The  spirit  of  God  came  upon  him.," 
on  which  "  he  took  up  his  parable,  and  said,  Balaam  the  son 
of  Boer  hath  said,  and  the  man  whose  eyes  are  open  hath  said  : 


t 


MIRACLES. 


91 


he  hath  said,  ^hich  heard  the  words  of  God,  which  saw  the 
vision  of  the  Almighty,  falling  into  a  trance,  but  having  his 
eyes  open  ;"  and  then  he  gives  forth  a  prophecy  of  the  pros- 
perity   awaiting   the   children    of   Israel    (Num.    xxiv.,   1-9). 
Samuel,  when  only  a  child,  had  a  vision,  in  which  the  Lord 
repeatedly    called   to    him,  and    after    gaining   his  attention 
denounced  to  him  his  superior  and  protector,  the  priest  Ui 
(I   Sam    iii    1-15).      The  prophet  Nathan  had  a  vision  in 
which  God  instructed  him  to  inform  David  that  his  house,  or 
temple,  was  to  be   built,   not   by  him,  but  by  his  son,  "  the 
throne  "  of  whose  "  kingdom  "  he  would  "  establish  for  ever 
(9  Sam   vii    1-17).     Job.  in  awe-inspiring  terms,  described  a 
^visitation  he  had.      "  In  thoughts,  from  the  visions  of  the 
ni<Tht,    (he    said,)  when    deep    sleep    falleth   on    men.      Fear 
came  upon  me,  and  trembling,  which  made  all  my  bones  to 
shake.     Then  a  spirit  passed  before  my  face  ;  the  hair  of  my 
flesh  stood  up."     An  image  was  before  him,  but  he  could  not 
discern  its  form,  and  then  he  gave  the  utterances  of  a  voice 
which    he   heard    (Job    iv.    12-21).       Among  the   prophets 
Ezekiel  and  Daniel  were  prominently  visited.      Lzekiel  had 
visions  of  heavenly  glory.     He  saw  an  amber-coloured  faery 
cloud   out  of  the  midst  of  which  came  four  creatures,  each  with 
four  wings  and  four  faces,  the  faces  being  those  of  a  man,  a 
lion,  an  ox,  and  an  eagle,  and  with  cloven  feet.     These  darted 
about  like  flashes  of  lightning.     Each  was  accompanied  by  a 
wheel  "so  high"  that  it  was  "dreadful."  and  the  "  rmg^.    ^"^ 
rims,  of  these  wheels,  "  were- full  of  eyes  round  about.        Ihe 
wheels  moved  as  they  moved,   "  for   the  spirit  of  the  hvmg 
creature   wa^  in   the  wheels."     The  wings  of  the    creatures 
created  a  noise  "  like  the  noise  of  great  waters,  as  the  voice  ot 
the  Almighty,  the   voice  of  speech,  as  the  noise  of  a   host 
Over  their  heads  was  a  firmament  "  as  the  colour  of  the  terrible 
crystal  "  and  above  the  firmament  was  the  likeness  of  a  sapphire 
throne   on  which  was  the  likeness  of  a  man  who  was  of  the 
colour  of  amber  fire.      "  This,"  it  is  said,  "  was  the  appearance 
of  the  likeness  of  the  glory  of  the  Lord."     Ezekiel  at  this  awful 
spectacle,  fell  flat  on  his  face,  but  wa^  raised,  and  then  had  to 
"open  his  mouth  "  and  eat  "  a  roll  of  a  book,"  wntten  inside 
and  outside  with  "lamentations,  and  mourning,  and  woe     re- 
presenting messages  he  wa^  to  communicate  to  the  rebellious 


92 


MIRACLES. 


MIRACLES. 


93 


Israelites.  In  another  vision  a  "spirit"  of  a  fiery  amber- 
colour  lifted  him  up  by  a  lock  of  his  head  between  earth  and 
heaven,  and  brought  him  to  Jerusalem,  and  then  he  saw  "  the 
glory  of  the  God  of  Israel"  as  on  the  former  occasion.  Here  he  had 
to  witness  "  abominations,"  or  certain  idolatrous  practices,  and 
after  being  charged  with  sundry  wrathful  denunciations,  the 
spirit  took  him  up  and  brought  him  to  Chaldea,  where  his  people 
were  in  captivity,  and  he  told  them  all  that  had  been  put  before 
him.  At  another  time,  he  was  brought  to  a  high  mountain  where 
there  was  a  "  frame  of  a  city."  He  then  saw  a  number  of 
minute  measurements  taken  of  gate-posts,  chambers,  court- 
yards, porches,  &c.,  connected  with  the  temple  and  its  asso- 
ciated buildings,  after  which  the  vision  he  had  first  seen 
re-appeared.  The  spirit  took  him  up  and  brought  him  into 
the  inner  court,  *'and,  behold,  the  glory  of  the  Lord  filled  the 
house,"  and  a  number  of  detailed  instructions  for  carrying  out 
sacrificial  w^orship  were  given  him.  The  inheritance  of  the 
Israelites,  and  the  partition  thereof  among  their  tribes,  was 
also  described  and  laid  down.  Daniel  was  one  who  "  had 
understanding  in  all  visions  and  dreams."  The  king  of 
Babylon  had  been  troubled  by  a  dream,  the  particulars  of 
which  had  not  fixed  themselves  on  his  memory.  His  wise 
men  undertook  to  interpret  the  dream,  but  to  discover  what 
the  dream  itself  was  lay  beyond  their  powers.  On  this  the 
king  became  "  very  furious,  and  commanded  to  destroy  all  the 
wise  men  of  Babylon."  Daniel  was  in  peril  with  the  rest,  but 
*'  the  secret"  was  ''revealed"  to  him  ''in  a  night  vision."  He 
afterwards  saw  in  a  vision  a  fight  between  a  ram  and  a  he-goat, 
and  certain  consequences  connected  with  their  horns,  which  it 
was  explained  to  him  represented  the  struggles  of  the  Medes 
and  Persians  with  the  Greeks  for  empire,  and  the  sequel, 
which  was  to  embrace  the  end  of  all  things.  Again  he  saw 
the  vision  of  a  man  w^hose  face  was  "  as  the  appearance  of 
lightning,  and  his  eyes  as  lamps  of  fire,  and  his  arms  and  his  feet 
like  in  colour  to  polished  brass,  and  the  voice  of  his  words  like 
the  voice  of  a  multitude."  This  personage  described  to  him 
certain  struggles  in  which  he  was  engaged.  He  said,  "  The 
prince  of  the  kingdom  of  Persia  withstood  me  one  and  twenty 
days  ;  but,  lo,  Michael,  one  of  the  chief  princes,  came  to  help 
me  ;  and  I  remained  there  with  the  kings  of  Persia."      After 


which,  one  with  "  the  appearance  of  a  man"  touched  the  pro- 
phet and  said,  "  Knowest  thou  wherefore  I  come  unto  thee  ? 
and  now  will  I  return  to  fight  with  the  prince  of  Persia  :  and 
when  I  am  gone  forth,  lo,  the  prince  of  Grecia  shall  come ; — 
and  there  is  none  that  holdeth  with  me  in  these  things,  but 

Michael  your  prince." 

In  the  New  Testament  such  visitations  also  occur.       Cor-  TOons. 
nelius  had  a  vision  of  an  angel  coming  to  him,  and  telling  him  Testament, 
to  send  for  Peter,  describing  that  "  he  lodgeth  with  one  Simon 
a  tanner,  whose  house  is  by  the  sea  side."      The  next  day,  as 
his  messengers   were    nearing  the  city  where  Peter  resided, 
Peter  fell  into  a  trance,  and  saw,  as  it  were,  a  sheet  let  down 
to  the  earth  filled  with  all  sorts  of  four-footed  animals,  insects, 
and  birds,  clean  and  unclean,  which  he  was  told  to  kill  and 
eat ;  and,  on  his  objecting,  he  was  rebuked,  and  the  operation 
of  presenting  these  creatures  to  him  as  food  was  performed 
three  times.      When  Cornelius's  messengers  had  arrived,  "  the 
Spirit  said  unto  him.  Behold,  three  men  seek  thee,"  and  he 
was  told  to  go  to  them  without  hesitation.      On  which  Peter 
went  to  Cornelius  and  preached  Jesus  successfully  to  him  and 
those  with  him,  which  was  the  object  of  the  vision.     As  Paul 
was  on  his  way  to  Damascus  to  persecute  the  Christians  there, 
a  strong  light  was  thrown  upon  him  from  heaven,  and  a  voice 
was  hesLvd  by  him  warning  him  to  desist  from  his  purpose. 
He  then  became  blind  for  three  days.      At  the  same  time  one 
Ananias  of  Damascus  was  visited  by  "  the  Lord  in  a  vision," 
and  told  to  go  and  restore  Paul  to  sight.       Paul  then  became 
a  convert  to  Christianity.      Paul  had  two  other  visions.      One 
was  to  induce  him  to  go  and  preach  in  Macedonia,  and  the 
other  to  continue  preaching  in  Corinth.       The  Apocalypse  is 
full  of  visions  bestowed  upon  the  writer  John.      The  first  set 
relate  to  things  of  earth,  namely,  to  the  condition  of  seven  out 
of  the  various  congregations  of  Christians  at  that  time  estab- 
lished.     The  next  set  relate  to  things  in  heaven.      "  A  door," 
he  tells  us,  "  was  opened  in  heaven,"  and  a  voice  "as  it  were 
of  a  trumpet,"  said  to  him,  "Come  up  hither,  and  I  will  shew 
thee  things  which  must  be  hereafter."      On  this,  objects,  such 
as  were  brought  before  Ezekiel  and  Daniel,  were  presented  to 
him,    namely,  a  resplendent   throne  with  one   sitting  on  it, 
winged  beasts  full  of  eyes,  and  resembling  various  animals, 


V? 


94f 


MIRACLES. 


:1 


MIRACLES. 


95 


False 
visions. 


Appari- 
tions of 
angels. 
Old  Test. 


and  monsters  of  still  more  formidable  shape  ;  and  with  this 
sort  of  imagery,  and  with  angelic  forms,  various  scenes  are 
enacted  before  him,  purporting  to  be  of  prophetic  import. 

At  the  same  time,  persons  not  really  visited  by  God  might 
come  forward  with  false  representations  ''  speaking  a  vision  of 
their  own  heart,  and  not  out  of  the  mouth  of  the  Lord,"  pro- 
phesying "  a  false  vision  and  divination,  and  a  thing  of  nought, 
and  the  deceit  of  their  heart,  of  whom  he  may  say,  I  sent 
them  not"(Jei;  xiv.  14,  15;  xxiii.  16).  And,  furthermore, 
in  times  when  the  nation  misbehaved,  true  visions  were  to  be 
withheld.  Then  "  night,"  it  was  said,  "  shall  be  unto  you, 
that  ye  shall  not  have  a  vision.  Then  shall  the  seers  be 
ashamed,  and  the  diviners  confounded  ;  yea,  they  shall  all 
cover  their  lips  ;  for  there  is  no  answer  of  God  "  (Micah  iii. 
6,  7).  "  They  shall  seek  a  vision  of  the  prophet  ;  but  the 
law  shall  perish  from  the  priest,  and  counsel  from  the  ancients  " 
(Ezek.  vii.  26).  ''The  law  is  no  more;  her  prophets  also 
iind  no  vision  from  the  Lord  "  (Lam.  ii.  9). 

We  advance  to  angelic  manifestations.  "  The  angel  of  the 
Lord  "  appeared  to  Hagar  when  she  fled  from  Sarah's  ill  usage 
of  her  to  the  wilderness,  and  comforted  her  with  promises ; 
and  he  "  called "  to  her  *'  out  of  heaven "  when  she  was 
again  in  distress,  ejected,  with  her  son,  out  of  Abraham's 
household  at  Sarah's  instance.  Two  angels  visited  Lot  at 
Sodom  and  there  excited  the  unnatural  lusts  of  the  people  of 
that  place.  An  angel  called  to  Abraham  "  out  of  heaven," 
w^arning  him  that  he  w^as  not  to  carry  into  actual  execution 
God's  order  to  him  to  sacrifice  his  son.  When  Abraham  sent 
his  servant  to  procure  a  wife  for  his  son,  he  assured  him  that 
God  would  depute  an  angel  to  go  before  him  and  direct  him. 
When  Jacob  was  on  his  way  home,  and  had  to  face  his 
brother  Esau,  whom  he  had  defrauded  and  was  afraid  of,  "  the 
angels  of  God  met  him."  When  he  was  about  to  bless  the 
sons  of  Joseph  before  his  death,  he  referred  to  an  angel  who 
had  "redeemed"  him  ''from  all  evil."  When  the  Egyptians 
came  in  pursuit  of  the  Israelites  on  their  leaving  Egypt,  "  the 
angel  of  God,"  who  had  preceded  the  camp,  now  came  to  the 
rear,  and  placed  himself  between  the  Israelites  and  their  pur- 
suers. This  angel  was  charged  to  conduct  them  to  the  pro- 
mised land;    and  he  appears  to  have  been  armed  with  full 


1 


1 


authority  over  them.      "  Behold,  I  send  an  angel  before  thee, 
to  keep  thee  in  the  way,   and   to  bring   thee  into   the  place 
w^hich  I  have  prepared.      Beware  of  him,  and  obey  his  voice, 
provoke  him  not ;  for  he  will  not  pardon  your  transgressions  : 
for  my  name  is    in   him.      But  if   thou  shalt  indeed   obey  his 
voice,  and  do  all  that  I  speak,  then   I  will  be  an  enemy  unto 
thine  enemies,  and  an  adversary  unto  thine  adversaries.      For 
mine  angel  shall  go  before  thee,  and  bring  thee  in  unto  the 
Amorites,    and    the    Hittites,    and    the    Perixzites,    and    the 
Canaanites,   the   Hivites,   and   the   Jebusites,  and   I  will  cut 
them  off"  (Ex.  xxiii.    20-23).      "And    I  will  send   an  angel 
before  thee  ;  for  I  will  not  go  up  in  the  midst  of  thee  ;  for 
thou   art  a   stiff-necked   people ;   lest  I  consume  thee  in  the 
way  "  (Ex.  xxxiii.  2,  3).      When  Balaam  was  riding  on  an  ass, 
"  the  angel  of  the  Lord  "  stood  in  a  narrow  pathway,  with  a 
wall  on  either  side,   with  a  drawn  sword  in  his  hand  ;  and 
when  Balaam  had   smitten  his  ass  for  turning  aside,  and  the 
ass  had   remonstrated   with  him    for  striking  her,  and   he   at 
length  saw  what  the  obstacle  was,  the  angel  told  him  but  for 
the  ass  so  swerving,  "  surely  now  also  I  had    slain  thee,  and 
saved  her  alive."     When  Joshua  was  before  Jericho,  "  behold, 
there  stood  a  man  over  against  him  with  his  sword  drawn  in  his 
hand,"  who  declared  himself  to  be  the  "  captain  of  the  host  of  the 
Lord."     The  angel  who  had  led  the  Israelites  into  the  promised 
land  came  to  a  place  called  Bochim,  and  told  them  he  would  not 
drive  out  the  inhabitants  before  them,  but  would  leave  them  to  be 
as  "thorns  in  their  sides,"  and  "their  gods  as  a  snare  unto  them." 
"  The  angel  of  the  Lord  "  visited  Gideon,  and  told  him  he  was 
ordained  to  "  smite  the  Midianites  as  one  man."     "  The  angel 
of  the  Lord  "  appeared  to  Manoah  and  his  wife,  and  promised 
them  their  son   Samson.      He  then   "does  wondrously,"  and 
ascends  to  heaven  "  in  the  flame  of  the  altar,"  where  they  had 
offered   sacrifice.      David  took  a  census  of  his  people.      The 
Lord  being  angered  at  this,  sent  him  a  message  through  the 
prophet  Gad,  giving  him  his  choice  between  famine,  three  months 
harrying  by  his  enemies,  or  pestilence.     David  preferred  not 
being  objected  to  his  enemies.      On  this  "  the  angel  of  the 
Lord  "  came  with  a  drawn  sword  and  destroyed  seventy  thou- 
sand men  of  Israel  with  pestilence.      "  And  God  sent  an  angel 
unto  Jerusalem  to  destroy  it  :  and  as  he  was  destroying,  the 


96 


MIRACLES. 


MIRACLES. 


97 


Lord  beheld,  and  he  repented  him  of  the  evil,  and  said  to  the 
angel  that  destroyed,  It  is  enough,  stay  now  thine  hand.     And 
the  angel  of  the  Lord  stood  by  the  thrashing  floor  of  Oman 
the  Jebusite.      And   David  lifted  up  his  eyes,   and  saw  the 
angel  of  the  Lord   stand  between  the  earth  and  the  heaven, 
having  a  drawn   sword  in  his  hand  stretched  out  over  Jeru- 
salem."     David  then  remonstrated  with  God,  reminding  him 
that  he  was  the  person  guilty  of  numbering  of  the  people  ; 
"but  as  for  these  sheep,"  he  said,  "what  have  they  done  ?" 
On  this  God  was  willing  that  David  should  atone  for  his  sin 
with  a  sacrifice,  which  was  performed  ;  after  which  "the  Lord 
commanded  the  angel,  and  he  put  up  his  sword  again  into  the 
sheath  thereof."      When  Elijah  was  asleep  under  a  juniper 
tree,  an  angel  touched  him,  and  bade  him  arise  and  eat.      He 
found   by  his  side  a  cake  and  a  cruse  of  water,  of  which  he 
partook  and  lay  down  again.     "The  angel  of  the  Lord,"  touched 
him  a  second  time,  saying,  "Arise  and  eat;  because  the  journey 
is  too  great  for  thee.      And  he  arose,  and  did  eat  and  drink, 
and  went  in  the  strength  of  that  meat  forty  days  and  forty 
nights  unto  Horeb  the  mount  of  God."      Ahaziah,  the  king  of 
Israel,  had  injured  himself  by  falling  out  of  an  upper  window, 
and  sent  to  an  idol  to  know  whether  he  was  to  recover.     "  The 
angel  of  the  Lord,"  in  consequence,  visited  Elijah,  directing  him 
to  intimate  to  the  king  that  for  this  transgression  he  should 
die.      The  king  sent  for    Elijah,   who  called  down   fire  from 
heaven  and  destroyed  two  successive  companies,  who  came  to 
take  him  before  the  king.      A  third  company  was  sent,  and 
"  the  angel  of  the  Lord  "  came  and  told   Elijah  that  he  might 
go  with  them.      In  the  time  of  king  Hezekiah,  the  Assyrians 
attacked  Jerusalem.      "  And  it  came  to  pass  that  night,  that 
the  angel  of  the  Lord  went  out,  and  smote  in  the  camp  of  the 
Assyrians  an  hundred  and  four  score  and  five  thousand  :  and 
when  they  arose  early  in  the  morning,  behold,  they  were  all 
dead  corpses."    When  Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abednego,  were 
thrown  into  a  fiery  furnace,  a  fourth  appeared  among  them, 
who,  in  "form,"  was  "like  the  son  of  God."      He  is  described 
as  an   am^el    sent  for  their  deliverance.      When  Daniel  was 
thrown  into  a  den  of  lions,  "God  sent  his  angel  "  to  "shut  the 
lions'  mouths,"   so  that  they  did  not  hurt  him.      An  angel 
visited  the  prophet  Zechariah,  and  showed  him  various  things. 


1 


1 


I » 


This  anorel  conversed  with  God,  and  then  "  talked "  with 
Zechariah  with  good  and  comfortable  words.  As  this  angel 
"  went  forth,"  "  another  angel  went  out  to  meet  him."  The 
angel  came  again  and  waked  Zechariah,  as  it  were  out  of  sleep. 

The  angel  Gabriel,  who  represented  himself  as  privileged  to  Apj-ari- 
"  stand  in  the  presence  of  God,"  appeared  to  Zacharias,  and  ^^^i^^^^^^^ 
promised  him  his  son  John   the    Baptist.      The  same  angel  Testament. 
appeared  to  Mary,  and  promised  her  her  son  Jesus.      "The 
angel  of  the  Lord  "  appeared  to  Joseph  in  a  dream,  and  told 
him  that  the  pregnancy  of  his  virgin  wife  was  by  conception 
"  of  the  Holy  Ghost."      On  the  night  of  the  birth  of  Jesus,  an 
angel  came  and  announced  the  event  to  some  shepherds  who 
were  out  with  their  flocks,  "  and  suddenly  there  was  with  the 
angel  a  multitude  of  the  heavenly  host  praising  God."     An 
angel  periodically  troubled  the  water  of  the  pool  of  Bethesda, 
to  impart  to  it  power  to  cure  the  first  sick  man  who  might 
plunge  in.      After  the  devil,  who  had  been  trying  to  tempt 
Jesus,   "  left  him,"  "  behold  angels  came  and  ministered  unto 
him."      And  when  he  was  breaking  down  in  the  mount  of 
Olives,  just  before  his  crucifixion,  "  there  appeared  an  angel 
from  heaven  strengthening  him."     An  angel  appeared  and  for- 
tified Paul  when  he  had  to  appear  before  Caesar.    The  woman,  or 
women,  who  went  to  the  sepulchre  where  Jesus  was  laid  after  his 
death,  saw  one  or  more  angels  on  the  spot,  and  had  communi- 
cation with  them.      When  the  apostles  were  put  in   prison, 
"  the  angel  of  the  Lord  by  night  opened  the  prison  doors,  and 
brought  them  forth."     When  Peter  was  in  prison,  "  the  angel 
of  the  Lord  came  upon  him,  and  a  light  shined  in  the  prison ; 
and  he  smote  Peter  on  the  side,"  bidding  him  get  up,  put  on 
his  garment,  and  follow   him  quickly.      "  The   angel  of  the 
Lord  "  appeared  to  Philip,  and  told  him  to  go  in  a  certain 
direction,  and  by  so   doing   he   met  with  a  certain  eunuch, 
whom  he  converted  and  baptised.     An  angel  in  a  vision  came 
to  Cornelius,  and  bid  him  send  for  Peter,  who  came  and   con- 
verted and  baptised  him  and  his  household.      "  The  angel  of 
the  Lord"  smote  Herod  for  personal  ostentation,  and  killed  ^ 
him.       Some,  we  are  told,   in  receiving  guests,  may  uncon- 
sciously be  entertaining  angels.     Little  children  have  angels 
appointed  to  them,  who  "  always  behold  the  face  "  of  God  in 
heaven.     The  seven  churches  of  the  Apocalypse  had  each  an 

G 


98 


MIRACLES 


Evil 
angels. 


Satan. 


Appari- 
tions of 


ano-el  attached  to  them,  who  had  to  watch    over   them  and 
answer  for  their  shortcomings.      The  favoured  dead,  as  m  the 
parable  of  the  rich  man  and  Lazarus,  are  carried  by  angels  to 
blissful  resting-places  ;  and  they  are,  in  short,  ''all  ministering 
spirits,  sent  forth  to  minister  for  them  who  shall  be  heirs  of 
salvation."     When  the  Divine  Majesty  holds  solemn  state  on 
appointed  occasions,  they  present  themselves  before  him,  as  we 
are  twice  told  in  Job;  and  they  are  to  swell  the  train  of  Jesus 
when  he  takes  to  himself  his  great  power  and  reigns  on  earth. 
But  some  of  these  angelic  beings  are  of  a  stamp  in  no  way 
to  be  tnisted.     They  are   said   to   have   cohabited  with   the 
daughters  of  men  on  whom  they  procreated  a  race  of  giants. 
Women,  apparently   because    liable    to    such    invasion,   when 
"  praying  or  prophesying,"  are  to  have  their  heads  covered,  in 
order   tcT  "have   power"    on    their    heads    "because    of    the 
angels;"  and  those  who  have  thus  transgi^essed,  not  keeping 
"their' first  estate,"  but  "going  after  strange  flesh,"  are  "re- 
served in  everlasting  chains  under  darkness"  unto  the  day  of 

judgment. 

The  human  race  have  a  great  adversary  in  the  world  ot 
spirits,  who  is  called  Satan.     On  the  occasion  when  God  is 
enthroned  in  state,  he  is  said  to  appear  before  him  among  the 
heavenly  hosts,  and  to  use  his  opportunity  to  work  evil  on  his 
human  victims.     He  is  described  as  "the  prince  of  this  world,'^ 
which  is  *'lying  in  wickedness,"  or  rather  "in  the  wicked  one;" 
"the  prince  of  the  power  of  the  air,  the  spirit  that  now  worketh 
in  the  children  of  disobedience."     The  prophet  Zechariah  de- 
clared   that    the    angel   who    appeared    to   him   showed  him 
"  Joshua  the  high  priest  standing  before  the  angel  of  the  Loixl, 
and  Satan  standing  at  his  right  hand  to   resist  him."     He 
appeared  personally  to  Jesus,  removing  him  bodily  from  place 
to  place,  and  endeavouring  to  bring  him  under  allegiance  to 
himself      And   in  the  end  an  angel  is  to  "  lay  hold  on  him," 
"bind  him"  for  "a  thousand  years,"  "cast  him  into  the  bot- 
tomless pit,  and  shut  him  up,  and  set  a  seal  upon  him  ;"  after 
which  he  is  to  be  let  loose  for  a  while,  and  then,  with  his 
angels,  is  to  be  cast  into  a  "  lake  of  fire  and  brimstone,''  and 
there  "  tormented  day  and  night  for  ever  and  ever." 

There  are  also  apparitions  of  God   himself.       "The  Lord 
appeared  unto  Abram,"  making  him  promises.     When  he  was 


MIRACLES. 


99 


"ninety  years  old  and  nine"  he  again  "appeared"  to  him,  God.  Old 
renewing  these  promises.  After  this  he  "  appeared  unto  him  ^^*^°^®°  ' 
in  the  plains  of  Mamre."  "  Lo,''  it  is  said,  "  three  men  stood 
by  him."  Abraham's  speech  was  apparently  addressed  to  but 
one  of  the  three,  as  he  used  the  singular  number,  "  My  Lord," 
and  two  of  the  three,  who  afterwards  went  away  to  Sodom,  are 
then  called  angels.  Abraham  treated  these  as  guests,  supply- 
ing them  with  water  to  wash  their  feet,  and  food,  consisting  of 
cakes,  butter,  milk,  and  veal,  of  which  they  partook.  His  son 
Isaac  was  then  promised  him,  and  afterwards  he  ventured  to 
intercede  for  Sodom,  proposing  that  the  place  should  be  spared 
if  fifty  righteous  men  should  be  found  in  it  ;  and  then,  improv- 
ing the  terms,  lowered  the  number  on  whose  account  the 
thrcEitened  judgment  was  to  be  remitted  to  forty-five,  forty, 
thirty,  twenty,  and  finally  to  ten,  below  which  he  did  not  ven- 
ture to  go.  "  The  Lord  appeared  "  to  Isaac  when  in  Gerar, 
telling  him  not  to  go  to  Egypt  in  a  time  of  famine,  and  then 
renewing  the  promises  to  him.  Jacob  was  on  his  way  home 
from  Chaldea  wdth  his  family,  and  flocks,  and  herds.  He  had 
sent  the  whole  across  a  ford  of  the  river  Jordan,  when  an 
adventure  befell  him.  "And  Jacob  was  left  alone;  and  there 
wrestled  a  man  wdth  him  until  the  breaking  of  the  day."  This 
personage  was,  however,  unable  to  overpower  the  patriarch, 
till  he  "touched  the  hollow  of  his  thigh,"  and  put  it  "out  of 
joint  as  he  wrestled  with  him."  Still  Jacob  would  not  let  him 
go  till  he  had  blessed  him,  and  at  the  conclusion  he  called 
the  place  Peniel ;  "  for,"  he  said,  "  I  have  seen  God  face  to 
face,  and  my  life  is  preserved."  Jacob  informed  Joseph  of 
another  vision  he  had  had  of  God.  "  God  Almighty,"  he  said, 
"  appeared  unto  me  at  Luz,  in  the  land  of  Canaan,  and  blessed 
me."  This  seemingly  was  his  vision  of  the  ladder  reaching  to 
heaven,  when  "  the  Lord  stood  above  it,"  and  addressed  him, 
which  happened  at  Luz.  Moses  had  frequent  manifestations 
of  God's  personal  presence.  When  he  received  from  God  his 
commission  to  deliver  his  kinsfolk  out  of  Egypt,  "  God  called 
unto  him  out  of  the  midst  of  the  bush,"  and  then  "  Moses  hid 
his  face,  for  he  was  afraid  to  look  upon  God."  After  this, 
Moses,  in  recounting  God's  ajDpearance  upon  Mount  Sinai  at 
the  giving  of  the  law,  says  to  the  Israelites,  "  The  Lord  talked 
with  you  face  to  face  in  the  mount  out  of  the  midst  of  the 


MIRACLES. 


101 


100 


MIRACLES. 


firP      I   Stood   between  the  Lord  and  you  at  that  time,  to 
row  youte  word  of  the  Lord  ;  for  ye  -e  afra^l    y  re.oa 
of  the  fire,  and  went  not  up  mto  the  mount        Who  is  there 
o   all  flesh  that  hath  heard  the  voice  of  the  hving  God  speak- 
in.  out  of  the  midst  of  the  fire,  as  we  have    and  Irved  1 
Advertinc^  to  this,  Moses,  in  subsequently  plead mg  with  God 
fa  c  that  Ae  surrounding  nations  had  "heard  that  thou  Lord 
art  among  this  people,  that  thou  Lord  art  seen  face  to  face 
though  elsewhere'  it  is  said  they  then  saw  "  no   inanner  of 
sStude  "     But  some  ventured  to  go  up  into  the  mount 
Td td  an  actual  view  of  God.      "  Then  -t  up  Mose.  ^^^ 
Aaron   Nadab  and  Abihu,  and  seventy  of  the  elders  of  Israel, 
Ind  they  saw  the  God  of  Israel;  and  there  was  under  his  feet, 
;  It  were,  a  paved  work  of  a  sapphire  stone,  and  as  i   were 
the  bX  ;f  heaven  in  his  clearness.  '  And  upon  the  nobles  of 
he  children  of  Israel  he  laid  not  his  hand  ;  also  they  saw  God, 
and  did  eat  and  drink."     But  on  a  subsequent  occasion,  when 
Moses  was  desirous  of  having  a  view  of  the  g^or^f  ^o^,  ^ 
mrtial  exhibition  was  all  that  was  allowed  him.        Ihou  canst 
Tt  •  he  was  then  told,  "  see  my  face  ;  for  there  shall  no  man 
see  me  and  live.-I  will  put  thee  in  a  clift  of  the  rock,  and 
^ill  cover  thee  with  my  hand  while  I  pass  by;  and  I  will  take 
away  mine  hand,  and  thou  shalt  see  my  back  parts,  but  my 
J^t  shall  not  be  seen."     And  so  "  the  Lord  descended  in  the 
cloud  and  stood  with  him  there,  and  proclaimed  the  name  of 
the  Lord,  and  the  Lord  passed  before  him."     Aaron.  Moses 
was  informed,  might  see  him,  but  only  on  stated  occasions 
when  he  had  to  officiate  before  the  ark.      "  I  will  appear. 
God  declared,  "  in  the  cloud  upon  the  mercy-seat.       Moses  was 
xnore  intimately  honoured.      Oa  one  occasion  his  brother  and 
sister.  Aaron  and  Miriam,  had  been  taking  him  to  task  °n 
account  of  his  marriage  with  an  Ethiopian  woman,     and   he 
Lord  came  down  in  the  pillar  of  the  cloud,  and  stood  in  the 
door  of  the  tabernacle,  and  called  Aaron  and   Miriam,     and 
rebuking  them  for  venturing  to  contend  with  Moses,  he  said 
"  With  him  will  I  speak  mouth  to  mouth,  even  apparently  and 
not  in  dark  speeches  ;  and  the  similitude  of  the  Lord  shall  he 
behold"     "And   there   arose  not."  it  is   declared,  after  the 
death  of  Moses,  "a  prophet  since  in  Israel  like  unto  Moses 
whom  the  Lord  knew  face  to  fax^e."     Manoah  looked  upon  the 


ano-el  who  came  to  himself  and  his  wife  as  a  manifestation  of 
God.      "We  shall  surely  die,"  he  said  to  his  wife,  "because  we 
have  seen  God."      "  In  Gibeon  the  Lord  appeared  to  Solomon 
in  a  dream  by  night,"  when  he  bestowed  upon  him  wealth  and 
wisdom.      When  he  had  built  the  temple,  "  the  Lord  appeared 
to  Solomon  the  second  time,  as  he  had  appeared  unto  him  at 
Gibeon."      "I  saw  the  Lord,"   declared  Micaiah,  " sitting  on 
his  throne,  and  all  the  host  of  heaven  standing  by  him  on  his 
right   hand   and   on   his  left,"  and   then   he   recounted  what 
passed  in  conversation  between  God  and  those  with  him.     It 
is  the  same  scene  as  twice  described  in  Job.      Isaiah  had  such 
a  vision.      "  In   the  year  that  king  Uzziah  died,"  he  tells  us, 
"I  saw  also  the  Lord  sitting  upon  a  throne,  bigh  and  lifted  up, 
and   his   train   filled  the  temple."      So  also  Ezekiel.      "And 
above  the  firmament  that  was  over  their  heads  was  the  like- 
ness of  a  throne,  as  the  appearance  of  a  sapphire  stone ;   and 
upon    the    likeness  of   the   throne   was   the    likeness  as   the 
appearance  of  a  man  above  it."     And  so  Daniel.      "  I  beheld 
till  the  thrones  were  cast  down,  and  the  Ancient  of  days  did 
sit,  whose  garment  was  white  as  snow,  and  the  hair  of  his  head 
like  the  pure  wool ;  his  throne  was  like  the  fiery  flame,  and 
his  wheels  as  burning  fire.     A  fiery  stream  issued  and  came 
forth  from  before  him  ;  thousand  thousands  ministered  unto 
him,  and  ten  thousand  times  ten  thousand  stood  before  him." 

So  also  John.      "  And,  behold,  a  throne  was  set  in  heaven,  Appan^- 
and  one  sat  on  the  throne.      And  he  that  sat  was  to  look  upon  q^^   New 
like  a  jasper  and   a  sardine  stone."     To  a  place  of  honour  by  Testament, 
that  throae  Jesus   is   said  to   have   been  translated.      When 
brought,  just  before  his  crucifixion,  before  the  high  priest,  he 
said,°"  Ye  shall  see  the  Son  of  man  sitting  on  the  right  hand 
of  power ;  "    and    after   his  death  and   resurrection,  "  he  was 
received  up  into  heaven,"  we   are  assured,  "and  sat  on  the 
right  hand   of  God."     And  just  before  his  own   martyrdom, 
Stephen  was    vouchsafed  a   sight   of  him.      "He,  being   full 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  looked  up  stedfastly  into  heaven,  and  saw 
the  glory  of  God,  and   Jesus    standing  on    the  right   hand    of 
God,  and  said,  Behold,  I  see  the  heavens  opened,  and  the  Son 
of  man  standing   on   the  right  hand  of  God."      He  "  is  set," 
declares    Paul,    "on    the   right   hand    of    the   throne   of   the 
Majesty  in  the  heavens."     But  he  is  to  have  a   special  throne 


102 


MIRACLFS. 


of  his  own  "  When  the  Son  of  man  shall  come  in  his  glory, 
and  all  the  holy  angels  with  him,  then  shall  he  sit  upon  the 
throne  of  his  glory."  ''  To  him  that  overcometh,  he  declares, 
"  will  I  Rrant  to  sit  with  me  in  my  throne,  even  as  I  also 
overcame,  and  am  set  down  with  my  Father  in  his  throne. 

And  yet  notwithstanding  all  these  declared  manifestations, 

we  are  assured  that  ''  no  man   hath   seen  God  at  any  time 

that  he   dwells    "  in   the  light  which  no  man  can  approach 

unto  •  whom  no  man  hath  seen,  nor  can  see."     Jesus,  how- 

Jesusmani-  ever, '  has    exhibited  himself  as     his  personal  representative, 

gT""      so   one   with   him    in   every   respect   as  actually  to   be  him. 

-  Philip  saith  unto  him.  Lord,  show  us  the  Father,  and  it 
sufficeth  us.  Jesus  saith  unto  him.  Have  I  been  so  long  time 
with  you,  and  yet  hast  thou  not  known  me,  Philip  ?  he  that 
hath  seen  me  hath  seen  the  Father ;  and  how  sayest  thou, 
then  show  us  the  Father  ?  "  Of  those  who  went  agamst  him 
he  said  "  Now  have  they  both  seen  and  hated  both  me  and 
my  Father."  Paul  accordingly  declares  him  to  be  ''  the  image 
of  the  invisible  God,"  "  the  brightness  of  his  glory,  and  the 
express  image  of  his  person,"  to  whom  all  who  trust  in  him 
are  to  be  conformed.  "We  all,  with  open  face  beholding  as 
in  a  glass  the  glory  of  the  Lord,  are  changed  into  the  same 
image  from  glory  to  glory,  even  as  by  the  spirit  of  the  Lord. 
"Now,"  says  Paul  again,  "we  see  through  a  glass  darkly; 
but  then  face  to  face  ;  now  I  know  in  part,  but  then  shall  I 
know  even  as  also  I  am  known."      The  church  is   said   to  be 

-  his  body,  the  fulness  of  him  that  hlleth  all  m  all.'  "  Be- 
loved "  adds  John,  ''  now  are  we  the  sons  of  God,  and  it  doth 
not  yet  appear  what  we  shall  be  ;  but  we  know  that,  when 
he  shall  appear,  we  shall   be  like  him  ;  for  we   shall  see  him 

as  he  is." 
Miracles  But  the    most   important   in   its  consequences   of   all   the 

wx^h™  miraculous  manifestations  said  to  have  been  vouchsafed  to 
of  Jesus,  inan,  are  those  which  are  centred  in  the  person  of  Jesns. 
He  is  stated  to  have  been  born  of  a  virgin  by  conception  of 
the  Holy  Ghost,  to  have  been  raised  from  the  dead,  and  to 
have  ascended  bodily  into  heaven.  To  the  accomplishment 
of  this  history  the  whole  earlier  dispensation  in  types,  ordi- 
nances, doctrines,  and  prophetic  annunciations  is  declared  to 
point ;  and  on  the  acceptance  of  its  facts  the  being  and  ulti- 
mate hopes  of  the  Christian  altogether  depend. 


MIRACLES. 


103 


p._You  have  certainly  put  before  me  a  startling   asssem-  ^c^^P^^^ 
blage  of  miraculous  exhibitions.     I  was  not  prepared  for  this. 
Am  I  expected  to  believe  the  whole  ? 

^^ You  must  do  so  if  you  are  to  believe  the  Bible  to   be 

of  God.     To  allow  any  one  the  liberty  of  making  his  selection 
among   the  facts  of  the  Bible,  so  as  to   say  what  he  is  pre- 
pared''to  accept  as  true,  and  what  he  rejects  as   otherwise,  is 
to  undermine  the  foundations  of  the  book,  and   to  place  it  on 
no  better  level  than  any  common  volume.      Besides,  where  is 
the  line  to  be  drawn   for  the  exercise  of  such  liberty  ?     One 
man  may  question  ten  of  the  miracles,  another  twenty,  a  third 
a  hundred,  until  perhaps  some  one  may  not  accept  ten  out  of 
the  whole  collection,  or  even  any,  and  yet  profess  to  look  on 
the  book  itself  as  of  divine  authority.      But,    in   truth,  as   I 
think  you  must  see,  the  Bible  teems  with  the  miraculous  from 
one  end  to  the  other  ;  and  to  cut  this  element  out  of  it  is  to 
take  from  it  the  very  Hfe  of  the  book,  as  a  book  from  God, 
leaving  nothing  remaining  but  an  empty  shell  of  humanistic 
construction  and  character. 

p. You  assuredly  drive  me   into  a  corner.     I   had   hoped 

that  I  might  have  questioned,  on  their  very  face,  such  state- 
ments as  that  a  serpent,  or  a  donkey,  held  conversation  with 
human   beings  ;    that   rods    were   turned    into   serpents,   and 
serpents   into  rods;    that    an   iron   axe-head   floated   on  the 
water  ;  that  an  angel  was  in  the  habit  of  coming  down  from 
heaven  to  stir  up  a  pool  of  water,  in  order  that  the  first  man 
who  might  throw  himself  in  might  be  cured  of  any  ailment  he 
might  happen  to  have  ;  that  a  dead   man  was  brought  to    life 
by\ccidentally  touching  another  dead  man's  bones  ;   and  that 
persons  were  cured   of  any  disease  they  might  have   by  con- 
tact with  other  people's  handkerchiefs,  or  by  the   shadows  of 
other  persons  passing  over  them. 

^._You    are    not    permitted     to    approach    the    subject  Li^^y^o/ 
in  that    sort  of  spirit  of  questioning.      If  you   test   a   state- 
ment in  the  Bible  simply  by  your  own  sense  of  its  propriety  or 
probability,  you  will  be  considered  setting  yourself  up  as  judg^ 
ino-  its  Ullecred  divine  author.     Are  you  prepared  to  go  that 

length  ? 

p. Certainly  I  would  not  venture  to  judge  God  in  respect 

of  anything  that  I  could  clearly  look  upon  as  his  work.      For 


104 


MIRACLES. 


example,  I  would  not  question  the  fitness  of  his  scheme  of 
creation,  including  all  that  I  see  of  it  around  me  on  earth,  or 
in  the  heavens.      Or,  to  come  closer  home,  to  what  I  know  ot 
more  intimately,  I  would  not  challenge  God  on  the  constitution 
of  my  own  being,  or  the  circumstance  of  my  existence.      He 
has  made  me,  and  I  must  be  content  to  be,  and  to  be  what  I 
am       I  feel  myself  frail  in  person,  infirm  in  mind  and  purpose, 
errino-  in  thought  and  action,  but  I  would  not  dare  to  say,  why 
did  y°ou  not  constitute  me  in  better  form,  or  with  attributes  as 
perfect  as  your  own  ?     Admiring  God  in  his  works,  I  can  fully 
trust  him  to  carry  out  all  his  purposes,  knowing  they  will  m  the 
end  prove  worthy  of  him.      I  am  an  atom  in  his  creation,  and 
assuredly  will  not   be   overlooked,   neglected,   or   abandoned 
But  at  present  we  have  to  deal  with  a  certain  book,  m  regard 
to  wliich  I  have  no  such  solid  evidence  that  it  is  one  of  his 
works,  in  the  sense  that  I  accept  the  other  objects  I  have  re- 
ferred to  as  his  creation.      Men  do  make  books,  and  this  may 
be  a  mere  human  work.      It  is  not  an  object  such  as  a  tree,  a 
river,  or  a  mountain,  in  the  production  of  which  I  know  man 
can  have  had  no  part.      I  have  to  satisfy  myself,  out  of  the 
multitude  of  books  which  there  are  in  the  world,  whether  this 
one  book  has  been  produced  by  God,  and  not  by  man.      If  it 
were  a  house,  for  instance,  of  which  I  was  told,  among  the 
many  houses  of  human  construction  which  there  are,  that  this 
particular  one  was  built  by  God,  and  not  by  man,   I  should 
consider  myself  at  liberty  to  go  over  it,  and  to  judge  whether 
it  had  been  laid  out  on  a  human  plan,  or  exhibited  signs  and 
defects  such  as  appear  in  human  workmanship,  as  in  the  selec- 
tion of  material,  in  measurements,  fittings,  occurrence  of  flaws, 
tool  marks,  &c.      If  I  may  not  examine  the  Bible  in  the  same 
manner,  and  with  the  same  purpose  of  ascertaining  the  truth 
of  its  pretensions  to  be  a  work  of  God,  I  know  not  how  I  am 
to  really  satisfy  myself  on  the  subject.      I  was  not  born  in  the 
system  of  the  Bible  as  you  or  others  may  have  been.     It  comes 
to  me  as  a  new  work,  and  if  I  may  not  exercise  what  faculties 
I  possess  in  judging  of  its  contents,  I  shall  have  to  accept  it  on 
credit,  without  judgment  of  my  own.     I  have  no  direct  channel 
that  I  know  of  whereby  I  may  receive  testimony  of  the  author- 
ship from  the  reputed  author  himself,  and  therefore  I  should 
have  to  rely  on  the  testimony  of  my  fellowmen.      In  other 


MIRACLES. 


105 


words,  I  should  have  first  to  beheve  in  man,  and  then,  through 

man   in  the  Bible. 

S'—I  admit  the  dilemma,  and  cannot  but  allow  that  yo.i 
have  no  proper  course  but  to  proceed  with  the  examination, 
and  in  this  I  am  prepared  to  help  you  to  my  best. 

p  —Thank  you.  Be  good  enough  to  lend  me  your  paper 
containing  the  account  of  these  miracles,  which  I  will  look 
carefully  over,  and  then  ask  you  for  any  explanations  I  may 

require. 

,S\_Here  it  is,  quite  at  your  service. 


MIEACLES. 


General 
remarks. 


IV. 

RENEWED  CONVERSATION. 

Pundit. — I  have  looked  over  your  paper,  and  will  now  make 
such  remarks  on  its  contents  as  occur  to  me. 

I  notice,  in  the  works  of  creation,  even  among  those  objects 
which  we  call,  by  comparison,  insignificant,  nothing  which  betrays 
poverty  of  thought  or  meanness  of  conception.    All,  on  the  con- 
trary, is  of  surpassing  excellence,  exhibiting  the  ideas  and  the 
workmanship  of  a  being  immeasurably  superior  to  ourselves.   The 
minutest  insect,  the  leaf  of  a  tree,  or  a  drop  of  rain,  involve 
plans  and  performances  far  beyond  man  to  devise  or  execute. 
But  when  I  turn  to  these   narratives   of  wonders  which  you 
have  put  before  me,    a   very  different   sort  of  impression    is 
created  in  my  mind.      Some  of  the  miracles  enacted  look  like 
mere  efforts  at  display, — the  doing  things  out  of  the  way  in  an 
ostentatious   manner,  just  to  show  what   the   performer   was 
capable  of.      For  example,  the   employing  a  lion  to  kill  a  dis- 
obedient prophet,  and   bears  to  kill  mocking  children  ;  ravens 
to  carry  food  to  a  man  ;  a  whale  to  swallow  a  man,  and  then 
to  throw  him  up  again  alive  ;  dividing  the  Red  Sea  and   the 
river   Jordan,  to   give   passages  across  ;  walking  on   the  sea  ; 
sending  one  man  to  get  cured   by  bathing  in  the  Jordan,  and 
another  in  the  pool  of  Siloam  ;  an  angel   ascending  to  heaven 
in  a   flame  ;    a   man  translated   to    heaven  in  a  chariot   and 
horses  of  fire  ;  parading  round  Jericho,  trumpeting  and  shout- 
ing for  the  magic  overthrow  of  its  walls  ;  making  the  sun  and 
moon  to  stand  still  relatively  to  the  earth,  and  the  shadow  of 
the   sun   to   go  backwards;   and   deputing  a  moving  star  to 
guide  men  on    a  journey.      Others,  again,   are  of  a  different 
complexion,  and  spring   from  poor,  low,  and  puerile  ideas.     I 


MIRACLES. 


107 


have   already    pointed  to   some    such  ;     namely,    the   talkmg 
animals,    the   rod    and    serpent  feats,    the   floating  iron,    the 
stirrino-  up  of  the  pool  of  Bethesda,  and  the   marvels  wrought 
by  ElLsha's  bones,  Paul's   handkerchiefs,  and   Peter's  shadow. 
I  may  further  instance,  as  of  a  like  sort,  the   getting  tribute- 
money  out  of  a  fish's  mouth,— the  hook  snapped  at,  and  the 
coin  nevertheless  held   fast ;   a  divine   being  fluttering   about 
as  a  dove,  or  descending  in  a  shower  of  fiery  tongues  ;  devils 
enterino-  swine  ;  the  operations  on  Gideon's  fleece  ;  the  burn- 
ing bush  ;  and  the  cursing  of  a  fig-tree.      In   other  instances 
the  acts  are   so  similar  in  description  as   to  amount  to  mere 
imitative  repetitions,  indicating  poverty  of  conception  to  de- 
vise miraculous  forms.    Such  are  the  talking  animals  ;  the  fre- 
quent rod  and  serpent  feats ;  the  conversion  of  water  at  one  time 
into  blood,  at  another  into  wine  ;  the  dividing  the   Red  Sea 
and  the  Jordan,  the  latter  three   several  times  ;  the   healing 
persons  by  means  of  the  Jordan,  and   the  pools  of  Bethesda 
and    Siloam,  and    three   times  by  the  spittle    of  Jesus ;   the 
sending  fire  down  frequently  in  acceptance  of  sacrificial  offer- 
ings ;     the    consuming    the    people    of    Sodom,    Nadab    and 
Abihu,  the  Israelites  in  the  wilderness,  the  followers  of  Korah, 
Dathan,  and  Abiram,  and  the  two  companies  who  came  after 
Elijah,  all  by  fire  from  heaven  ;  the  perpetuating  the  supply 
from  one  widow's  handful   of  meal   and  cruse  of  water,   and 
another  widow's  pot  of  oil ;   the  multiplying  food,  at  one  time 
for   a   hundred  men,  at   another  for  five  thousand,  and  at  a 
third    for  four  thousand  ;  the  stopping  the  course  of  the  sun, 
and  the  sending  him  back  on   his  course.      Now,  if  the  object 
of  a  miracle  is  to  exhibit  God  in  some  special  and  transcendant 
manner,  it  is  quite  defeated  when   the  actions    attributed    to 
him   put  him  before  us  in  a  poor  or  unworthy  aspect,  such  as 
even  a  human  being,  having  due  regard  to  the  estimation  of 
his  fellow-men,  would  be  loth  to  display  himseff  m. 

Student.— I   cannot   but    allow  that    your   strictures    are 
crenerally  just,  and   that  the  instances  you   have  selected  bear 
the  characteristics  you   impute  to  them.     Their  proper  fitness     , 
must  of  course  depend  upon  their  adaptation  to  the   circum- 
stances surrounding  them. 

P.— Then  let  us  judge  somewhat  of  these   circumstances,  ^e^^^ 
Why  was  a  serpent  made  use  of  to  converse  with  Eve  ? 


108 


MIRACLES. 


S  —Witli  us  evil  is  suggested  to  us  readily  by  the  action 
of  our  own  thouglits  ;  but  it  was  not  so  with  our  first  parents, 
Adam  and   Eve.     God,  after   establishing  the  whole   creation, 
pronounced  of  it,  that  all  was  good.      Eve  thus   had  not  the 
impulse  within  her  to  go  wrong  which  we  have.     God  wishec 
to  put  her  and  Adam  upon  probation.      They  were   at  that 
time  so  innocent  as  not  to  know  good   from   evil.     The  object 
was  to  present  evil  to  them,  and  to  see  how  they  would   re- 
ceive it.      As  evil  could   not  suggest  itself  to  them  from  their 
own  thoughts,  it  had  to  be  put  before  them  from  outside,  an. 
the  serpent  was  employed  for  the   purpose.     God  gave   then 
a  certain  command,  and  the  serpent  induced  them  to  break  it. 

p The  experiment  seems  to   me  an  extraordinary   one 

and  scarcely  fair.     If  Eve  did  not  know  good  from  evil,  how 
should  she   be   able  to  decide  whether  it  was  best  for  her  to 
attend  to  what  God   had   addressed  to   her,  or  to  what  the 
serpent  had  said  ?     She  was  without  power  of  discernment. 
S. — That  I  cannot  explain  to  you. 
p_ Did  the  serpent  know  that  he  was  leading  Eve  to  do 

GVll  ^ 

5— Assuredly  he  did.  What  he  said  is  stated  to  have 
proceeded  from  his  great  subtlety.  "Now  the  serpent  was 
more  subtle  than  any  beast  of  the  field." 

p. Then  there  was  subtlety  among  the  beasts  of  the  held, 

and  this  was  the  most  subtle  of  them  all  1 
S. — Apparently  so. 

p__But   I  thought    the   whole    creation   was   pronounced 
solidly  good.     How  then  can  evil  have   been  thus  prevailing 
among  the  beasts  1 
S. — I  cannot  tell  you. 

p If  the  serpent  and  the   other  beasts  were  thus  subtle, 

which,  I  take  it,  means  sly  and  artful,  able  to  pervert  good 
into  e'vil,  then  they  at  all  events  had  a  knowledge  of  good  and 
evil,  and  were,  so  far,  more  highly  organised  than  the  human 
beings  who  were  the  lords  of  the  creation. 

^  — So   it  would  certainly   seem.     The   serpent,  however, 
whooverreached  and  misled  Eve,  is   currently  thought  to  have 
been  the  devil  appearing  to  her  in  the  form  of  a  serpent. 
p. — Is  it  so  said  in  the  Bible  1 


MIRACLES. 


109 


g^ It  is  not.      The  devil  is  however  adverted   to  as  "that 

old  serpent  which  deceiveth  the  whole  world." 

p  —The  use  of  a  mere  phrase  of  that  sort  does  not  appear 
to   me  to  warrant   the  idea  that   the  devil   was   the   actual 
serpent    in   Eden.      The   circumstance  of  there   having   been 
such  a  serpent  as   the  one  that  tempted  Eve,  may,  m  truth, 
have  suggested   the   application  of  the  term   serpent  to    the 
devil  as  a  mere  epithet.      If  we  may  say  that  this  Eden  ser- 
pent, who  is  described  distinctly  as  a  beast  of  the  field,  and 
is  spoken  of  relatively  to  the  other  beasts  of  the  field,  even  as 
to  their  common   attribute  of  subtlety,  was  in  truth  the  per- 
sonation of   a  being  from  quite   another   sphere,    called   the 
devil,  then  we  certainly  should  be  making  an   addition  to  the 
words  of  the  Bible,  which  we  are  cautioned  against  venturing 
to  do  at  the  peril  of  our  salvation. 

^._I  admit  that  we  are  without  warrant  for  saymg  that 
the  "serpent  in  Eden  was  other  than  what  it  is  described  to 
have  been,  namely,  a  beast  of  the  terrestrial  creation. 

p. What  was  the  result  to  the  parties  concerned  ensumg 

from  this  probation  ?  nc    -  a 

^ Adam  and   Eve  were  condemned  to  toil,  suffering,  and 

death  ;   and  the  serpent  was  thenceforth  to  progress  upon  his 

belly,  and  to  eat  dust. 

p It  seems  to   me   that  the  heaviest  punishment  fell  on 

those  upon  whom  no  human  judge  could  have  charged  guilt. 
In  what  way  was  the  sentence  carried  out  against  the  serpent  ? 

S  —He  certainly  moves  on  his  belly,  but  I  cannot  say  that 
he  feeds  on  dust.      He  eats  small  animals,  birds,  frogs,  and 

insects 

P  —Apparently,  from  his  form,  he  never  could  have  moved 
otherwise  than   on   his  belly.      Had  he,  before  this   event,  a 

different  form  ? 

S  —No  •  not  according  to  the  observation  we  can  make. 
A-es  before  the  event  in  Eden,  serpent  forms,  such  as  we 
now  see,  are  found  to  have  been  deposited  m  strata  of  the 
earth  They  have  been  discovered,  for  example,  m  the  London 
clay,  which  is  the  lowest  of  what  are  called  the  tertiary  de- 

^^P.!LAnd,  without  speaking  of  eels  and  water  snakes,  there 
1  The  '*  Testimony  of  the  Rocks,"  by  Hugh  MiUer,  82. 


MIRACLES. 


Ill 


110 


MIRACLES. 


are   the  worms   of  the   earth,  which  are   equally  reduced    to 
going  upon  their  bellies,  and   yet  cannot   be   associated  with 

the  event  in  Eden. 

S  —That  is  true.  There  is  a  whole  class  of  this  descrip- 
tion which  are  called  Annelides.  Remains  of  some  of  gigantic 
size,  having  the  thickness  of  a  man's  arm,  have  been  found  m 
the  Old  Red  Sandstone,  a  deposit  of  vast  antiquity,  belonging 
to  what  is  termed  the  Devonian  era.^ 

P.— Earthworms  certainly  move  in  a  painful  manner,  but 
then  they  are  formed  for  burrowing  in  the  earth  rather  than 
goino-  over  its  surface.  The  serpent's  movements,  on  the 
contrary,  are  quick  and  graceful,  and  not  at  all  such  as  one 
would    think  to   have   been  imposed    upon   him    by  way   of 

punishment. 

^^_Yes,  he  certainly  is  quite  unimpeded  in  his  movements. 
We  have  but  few  of  the  species  in  my  part  of  the  world,  but  I 
will  read  you  some  extracts  I  have  made  which  describe  his 
powers  of  locomotion.     "  Serpents,"  says  Professor  Owen,  "  are 
too  commonly  looked  down  upon  as  animals  degraded  from  a 
higher  type  ;   but  their  whole  organisation,  and  especially  their 
bony  structure,  demonstrate  that  their  parts  are  as  exquisitely 
adjusted  to  the  form  of  their  whole,  and  to  their  habits  and 
sphere  of  life,  as  is  the  organisation  of  any  animal  which  we 
call   inferior  to  them.      It    is   true   that   the  serpent  has  no 
limbs,  yet  it  can  outchmb  the  monkey,  outswim  the  fish,  out- 
leap   the  jerboa,   and,  suddenly  losing  the   close  coils   of  its 
crouching  spiral,  it  can  spring  into  the  air,  and   seize  the  bird 
upon  the  wing :  all  these  creatures  have  been  observed  to  fall 
its  prey.     The  serpent  has  neither  hands  nor  talons,  yet  it  can 
outwrestle  the  athlete,  and  crush  the  tiger  in  the  embrace  of 
its  ponderous  overlapping  folds.     Instead  of  licking  up  its  food 
as  it  glides  along,  the  serpent  uplifts  its  crushed  prey,  and  pre- 
sents It,  grasped  in  the  death-coil  as  in  a  hand,  to  its  slimy 
gaping  'mouth.      It   is   truly  wonderful    to   see   the  work    of 
hands,  feet,  and  fins,  performed  by  a  modification  of  the  ver- 
tebrate column."  ^     Another  observer  describes  the  movements 
of  a  larcre  black  snake  he  saw  "  sliding  stealthily  through  the 
branche^'s"    in   pursuit   of  birds.       ''That   a   legless,    wingless 

1  *«  Past  and  Present  Life  of  the  Globe,"  by  Dr  Page,  94. 

2  On  the  Vertebrates. 


ass. 


creature,  should  move  with  such  ease  and  rapidity  where  only 
birds  and  squirrels  are  considered  at  home,  lifting  himself  up, 
letting  himself  down,  running  out  on  the  yielding  boughs,  and 
traversing  with  marvellous  celerity  the  whole  length  and  breadth 
of  the  thicket,  was  truly  surprising.  I  could  but  admire  his 
terrible  beauty,  his  black,  shining  folds,  his  easy,  gliding  move- 
ment, head  erect,  eyes  glistening,  tongue  playing  like  subtle 
flame,  and  the  invisible  means  of  his  almost  winged  loco- 
motion."^ 

P. — Well,  it  is  evident  that  the  serpent's  form  is  one  of  the 
many  wonderful  structures  by  which  God  adapts  means  to 
ends,  and  is  not  a  malformation,  designed  to  incapacitate  the 
animal  by  way  of  punishment  for  transgression.  It  is  appa- 
rent also  that  the  present  has  always  been  his  proper  form,  and 
that  his  method  of  progressing  on  his  belly  did  not  originate  in 
Eden.  The  account  of  the  use  made  of  the  serpent  in  Eden  is 
wanting  therefore,  as  far  as  I  can  see,  in  accuracy  as  well  as 
fitness. 

Let  us  pass  to  the  talking  donkey.     Please  to  tell  me  the  Balaam' 
circumstances  under  which  this  phenomenon  was  exhibited. 

S. — The  Israelites,  on  their  way  to  the  land  promised  them, 
had  encamped  in  the  plains  of  Moab.  The  Moabites  were 
alarmed  and  distressed  at  the  presence  of  such  a  host.  Their 
king  then  sent  for  Balaam,  a  prophet,  to  come  and  curse  them, 
hoping  thereby  to  have  power  to  drive  them  out.  The  mes- 
sengers were  princes  of  the  land,  and  took  with  them  for 
Balaam  "  the  rewards  of  divination."  Balaam,  however,  said 
he  could  not  go  without  first  learning  what  was  the  will  of 
God.  On  this  God  is  said  to  have  come  to  him,  and  to  have 
told  him  not  to  go,  for  the  people  were  to  be  blessed,  not 
cursed.  Balaam  consequently  refused  to  accompany  the  king's 
messengers.  On  this  the  king  sent  him  persons  of  still  greater 
consequence,  with  high  offers  of  honour  and  wealth.  Balaam 
replied  that  no  amount  of  gold  and  silver  would  tempt  him  to 
disobey  God,  whom,  however,  he  said  he  would  again  consult. 
On  this  God  told  him  to  go,  but  to  say  only  what  he  might 
dictate  to  him.  Balaam  accordingly  went,  but  God's  anger 
was  kindled  against  him  for  going,  and  an  angel  was  sent  with 
a  drawn  sword  to  meet  him  on  the  way.     Balaam  did  not  at 

1  ♦*  With  the  Birds,"  in  the  Atlantic  Monthly. 


112 


MIRACLES. 


Lions, 
bears, 
ravens 


and 


first  see  the  angel,  but  the  ass  on  which  he  rode  did,  and  re- 
fused to  move  forward,  crushing  Balaam's  foot  against  a  wall. 
On  this  Balaam  struck  her  three  times,  and  thereupon  "  the 
Lord  opened  the  mouth  of  the  ass,"  and  she  expostulated  with 
him.  The  am^el  afterwards  told  Balaam  that  but  for  the  ass 
swervinor  as  she  had  done,  he  would  have  killed  liim.  Balaam 
then  apologised,  and  offered  to  go  back,  but  the  angel  told  him 
to  go  on,  but  to  say  only  what  he  might  put  into  his  mouth. 
Balaam  accordingly  goes  forward,  and  when  the  king  bids  him 
curse  the  Israelites,  he  blesses  them  abundantly.  The  king 
repeats  the  experiment  twice  more,  but  Balaam  utters  nothing 
but  blessings  for  Israel,  and  finally,  he  denounces  judgment  on 
his  own  people.  On  this  he  is  expelled  from  the  king  s  pre- 
sence with  dishonour. 

P. — Did  no  particular  results  follow  from  the  utterances  of 

the  ass  ? 

^. — None.  They  were  of  a  very  commonplace  kind,  re- 
lating to  her  own  past  services  and  docility  as  an  ass,  and 
led  to  nothing. 

P. — I  cannot  at  all  make  out  what  opening  there  was  for 
the  intervention  of  the  angel,  or  for  the  ass  being  gifted  with 
speech.  Nothing,  as  far  as  I  can  judge,  could  be  more  un- 
exceptionable than  the  conduct  of  Balaam. 

There  was  a  lion  which  killed  a  deceived  prophet,  and  two 
bears  which  killed  a  number  of  children,  and  one  prophet 
was  preserved  from  lions  into  whose  den  he  had  been  thrown, 
and  another  was  fed  by  ravens.  Did  any  results  ensue  from 
the  control  thus  exercised  over  these  animals  ? 

S. — None  that  I  can  point  to.  They  were  simple  inci- 
dents which  led  to  nothing  in  particular.  Those  killed  were 
of  course  so  disposed  of,  and  the.  prophets  favoured  were  men 
of  God  before,  and  remained  so. 

P. — Did  any  one  witness  the  act  of  the  ravens  feeding 
Elijah,  so  as  to  note  how  God  cared  for  his  people  ? 

S. — No ;   that  happened  in  a  desert  place. 

P, — But  when  Daniel  was  thrown  into  the  lion's  den, 
many  must  have  been  cognizant  of  that  fact.  Were  any  of  these 
brought  to  God  by  seeing  how  wonderfully  he  had  protected 
the  prophet  ? 

S. — The  king  Darius  was  altogether  on   Daniel's  side,  and 


MIRACLES. 


113 


m 


\ 


when  he  came  out  scathless  from  the  lions'  den,  he  issued  a 
proclamation  that  all  his  people  should  worship  Daniel's  God. 
Nothing,  however,  apparently  came  of  this,  for  they  continued 
idolaters  to  the  end. 

P. — What   are  the  incidents  connected  with  Jonah  being  .Tonah  and 

the  whale. 

sv; allowed  by  a  whale  ? 

S. — Jonah  was  commissioned  by  God  to  denounce  judgment 
upon  Nineveh,  because  of  their  wickedness.      But  he  fled  from 
God,   and   took    shipping   for  Tarshish.       God   overtook  him 
with  a   tempest,  and   the   vessel  being  in  danger,  the  people 
cast  lots  to  know  on  whose  account  the  storm  had  been  sent, 
and  the  lot  fell  on  Jonah.      On  questioning  him,  he  confessed 
that  he  was  flying  "  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord,"  and  he 
told  them  that  if  they  threw  him  into  the  sea  it  would  become 
calm.     The  sailors  were  reluctant  to  do  this,  and  tried  to  save 
the  vessel   by  rowing  hard.      Not,  however,   succeeding,  they 
implored  God  that  they  might  not  all  perish   because  of  one 
man,  and  praying  him  not  to  "  lay  upon"  them  his  "innocent 
blood,"  as  in   fact  the  deed  was  God's,  they  threw  Jonah  into 
the  sea.      Immediately  there  was  a  calm,  and  the  Lord  having 
"  prepared  a  great  fish  to  swallow  up  Jonah,"  he  was  accord- 
ingly so  swallowed.      Then  he  prayed  to  God  "  out  of  the  fish's 
belly ;  "    and  after  being  there  three  days   and  three   nights, 
"  the  Lord    spake   unto  the  fish,  and  it  vomited   out    Jonah 
upon  the  dry  land." 

P. — This  seems  to  me  a  very  childish  story.      How  could 
a  man   attempt  to  "  flee  from  God,"  who  is  everywhere  ?     A 
prophet,  professing  to  have  direct  intercourse  with  God,  could 
not  have  been  without  this  universal  knowledge. 
^. — I  am  not  able  to  reply  to  this. 

P. — How  could  Jonah  know  that  the  sea  would  become 
calm  if  he  were  thrown  into  it  ?  The  sailors  looked  upon  the 
act  as  a  criminal  one,  which  it  undoubtedly  was,  asking  God, 
in  a  most  extraordinary  way,  to  take  the  guilt  of  the  "  innocent 
blood  "  upon  himself,  and  not  throw  it  upon  them.  Certainly, 
if  any  one  in  these  days  told  you  that  he  was  "  fleeing  from  - 
the  presence  of  God,"  that  God  had  consequently  caught  him 
up  with  this  storm,  and  that  it  would  be  assuaged  if  he  were 
thrown  into  the  sea,  you  would  set  him  down  as  gone  mad,  and 
treat  him  accordingly. 


114 


MIRACLES. 


The 

exodus. 
Narrative. 


S. — I  have  no  explanation  to  offer  on  these  heads. 

p. — I   see  in  your   paper  you   call   the   great   fish   which 
swallowed  Jonah  a  whale.      Have  you  warrant  for  this  ? 

S. — Yes,  it  is  so  specified  in  Matt.  xii.  40. 

P. — In  what  sea  was  the  whale  found  ? 

S. — In  the  Mediterranean. 

p. — Is  that  a  place  frequented  by  whales  ? 

S. No,  it  is  an  inland  sea,  nearly  land-locked,  and   too 

warm  a  region  for  whales.      They  are  only  met  with  'in  parts 
of  the  ocean  much  more  north  or  much  more  south. 

p. I  presume  a  whale  was  selected  for  swallowing  Jonah, 

because  of  its  great  capacity,  giving  him  space  to  move  about 
in  its  belly  as  if  h-e  had  been  in  a  chamber. 

S. Apparently  so;   but  in  making  the  selection  the  small- 

ness  of  its  swallow  has  been  overlooked. 

p. — What  about  that  ? 

S. Why,    the   whale    lives   by   sucking  in   small    marine 

animals  of  about  the  size  of  the  end  of  your  finger,  and  h^  a 
swallow  only  in  proportion  to  the  size  of  its  food. 

p. Then  Jonah  could  not  have  gone  down  the  whale's 

throat  after  all. 

S. — Certainly  not  down  that  of  any  such  «is  we  know  of. 

p. — For  whose  benefit  was  this  miracle  enacted  ? 

g^ — Much  is  made  of  it  in  the  New  Testament,  where  it  is 
referred  to  repeatedly  by  Jesus  as  the  type  of  his  own  burial 
and  resurrection,  but  there  appear  to  have  been  no  witnesses 
to  it  to  be  impressed  at  the  time  with  the  occurrence.  The 
Ninevites,  to  whom  Jonah  was  commissioned,  were  far  off 
inland,  and  the  jailors  had  been  parted  with  three  days  before 
Jonah  was  cast  on  shore  by  the  whale. 

p. It  was  an  exhibition  then  enacted  without  persons  to 

whom  to  exhibit  it. 

Be  good  enough  now  to  recount  to  me  the  circumstances 
under  which  the  Israelites  had  a  passage  made  for  them 
through  the  Red  Sea,  and  were  supported  for  so  many  years 
in  the  wilderness  with  food  from  heaven. 

S. — Jacob  and  his  family  had  migrated  to  Egypt  in  a  time 
of  famine.  They  were  at  first  well  used  by  the  rulers  of 
Egypt,  but  they  increased  prodigiously  in  numbers  so  as  from 
seventy  males  (Gen.  xlvi.  27)  to  swell,  in  the  fourth  genera- 


MTRACLES. 


115 


. 


tion  (Gen.  xv.  16),  to  a  population  of  two  or  three  millions. 
The  succeeding  kings  consequently  became  apprehensive  that 
they  might  master  the  empire.  The  Israelites,  who  occupied 
a  district  called  Goshen,  were  then  oppressed,  and  put  to  hard 
labour  as  bondsmen,  in  order  to  keep  them  down.  The 
patriarchs  had  been  promised  that  their  descendants  should 
be  thus  multiplied,  and  that  they  should  have  possession  of 
the  land  in  which  they  themselves  roamed  about  as  strangers 
and  pilgrims.  The  land  to  be  given  them  was  described  as 
flowing  with  milk  and  honey,  so  abundant  was  to  be  their 
prosperity  in  it,  but  the  actual  occupants  had  first  to  be  got 
rid  of.  The  set  time  having  come  for  fulfilling  these  pro- 
mises, Moses  was  deputed  by  God  to  deliver  the  people  out  of 
Egypt,  and  to  conduct  them  to  their  inheritance,  and  his 
brother  Aaron  was  joined  with  him  in  the  mission.  God  per- 
formed sundry  wonders  before  Moses  by  way  of  giving  him  his 
credentials,  and  Moses  at  length,  after  attempting  to  avoid  the 
task  assigned  him,  consented  to  undertake  it.  The  plan  laid 
down  was  this.  The  Lord  says  to  Moses,  "  When  thou  goest 
to  return  unto  Egypt,  see  that  thou  do  all  those  wonders  be- 
fore Pharaoh,  which  I  have  put  in  thine  hand  :  but  I  will 
harden  his  heart,  that  he  should  not  let  the  people  go."  Then 
there  comes  an  interlude,  which  is  thus  described  :  ''And  it 
came  to  pass  by  the  way  in  the  inn,  that  the  Lord  met  him, 
and  sought  to  kill  him,"  but  Moses  is  saved  by  his  wife  Zipporah 
circumcising  their  son.  Moses  and  Aaron  after  this  go  before 
Pharaoh  with  their  message  from  God,  w^hich  was  this  :  *'  Thus 
saith  the  Lord  God  of  Israel,  Let  my  people  go,  that  they  may 
hold  a  feast  unto  me  in  the  wilderness."  Pharaoh  asks  who 
this  God  was  whom  he  was  to  obey,  when  they  reply,  "  The 
God  of  the  Hebrews  hath  met  with  us :  let  us  go,  we  pray 
thee,  three  days'  journey  into  the  desert,  and  sacrifice  unto  the 
Lord  our  God ;  lest  he  fall  upon  us  with  pestilence,  or  with  the 
sword."  Pharaoh  refuses,  and  lays  heavier  burdens  on  the 
people,  saying  that  it  was  out  of  mere  idleness  that  they  pre- 
tended to  want  to  go  forth  to  sacrifice.  Moses  thereupon  re- 
proaches God  with  these  results,  saying,  "  Since  I  came  to 
Pharaoh  to  speak  in  thy  name,  he  hath  done  evil  to  this 
people  ;  neither  hast  thou  delivered  thy  people  at  all."  God 
bids  him  proceed  with  his  errand,  but  Moses  seriously  objects. 


116 


MIRACLES. 


Then  the   Lord  encourages  him,  saying,   "  See,   I  have  made 
thee    a    god    to    Pharaoh,"    and   adds,    ''And   I   will   harden 
Pharaoh's  heart,  and  multiply  my  signs  and  my  wonders  in 
the  land  of  Egypt.      But  Pharaoh  shall  not  hearken  unto  you, 
that  I  may  lay  my  hand  upon  Egypt,  and  bring  forth  mine 
armies,  and  my  people,  the  children  of  Israel,  out  of  the  land 
of  Egypt   by   great  judgments."      Pharaoh,  when   again   ad- 
dressed, asks  for  a  miracle.     Aaron  then  performs  the  rod  and 
serpent  feat  before  him,  and  Pharaoh's  magicians  do  the  like. 
On  this  God  ''  hardened  Pharaoh's  heart,"  and  he,  of  course, 
refuses  the  request  made  of  him.      Aaron  then  turns  all  the 
waters  of  Egypt  in  their  "  streams,"  "  rivers,"  "  ponds,"  and 
"  pools"    into    blood,    and    the    magicians    do    the    like,    and 
Pharaoh's  heart  continued  hardened,  "  as  the  Lord  had   said." 
After  this  Aaron   called  frogs  into  being,  and  "covered  the 
land  of  Egypt"  with  them,  and  the  magicians  did  the  same. 
Pharaoh  then  says,  that  if  the  frogs  are  removed  he  will  "  let 
the   people   go,  that   they  may  do  sacrifice  unto  the   Lord." 
The  frogs  are  killed  off,  but  Pharaoh's  heart  becomes  again 
hardened,  "  as  the  Lord  had  said."     After  this  the  dust  of  the 
land  is  changed  into  lice.      The  magicians  try  to  execute  this 
miracle,  but  fail.      Pharaoh,  however,  remains  as  hardened  as 
before.      Then   swarais  of  flies  are  sent,  the  land  of  Goshen, 
however,  where  the  Israelites  are,  being  kept  free.      Pharaoh, 
upon  this,  sends  for  Moses  and  Aaron,  and  says  they  may  per- 
form their  sacrifice  where  they  were.      They  explain  that  they 
cannot  do  so  in  Egypt,  but  must  "  go  three  days'  journey  into 
the  wilderness,"  and  sacrifice  as  God  "shall  command"  them. 
When  the  flies  were  removed,  Pharaoh's  hardness  of  heart  re- 
turned.    Then  a  murrain  was  sent  "  upon  the  horses,  upon  the 
asses,  upon  the  camels,  upon  the  oxen,  and  upon  the  sheep" 
of  the  Egyptians ;   "  and  all  the  cattle  of  Egypt  died  :  but  of 
the  cattle  of  the  children  of  Israel  died  not  one."      Pharaoh 
continued  hardened.      Then  a  boil  was  sent  "  upon  man  and 
upon  beast  throughout  all  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  the  magi- 
cians could  not  stand  before  Moses  because  of  the  boils  ;    for 
the  boil  was  upon  the  magicians,  and  upon  all  the  Egyptians.'* 
Still  Pharaoh  remained  hardened,  "  as  the  Lord  had   spoken 
unto    Moses."       God    then    sent    a    threatening    message    to 
Pharaoh,  saying,  "  In  very  deed  for  this  cause  have  I  raised 


MIRACLES. 


117 


thee  up,  for  to  show  in  thee  my  power ;    and  that  my  name 
may  be  declared  throughout  all  the  earth."     After  this,  de- 
struction by  hail  was  threatened  upon  all  who  did   not  take 
shelter  from  it,  and  there  came  the  storm   of  "  thunder  and 
hail,  and  the  fire  ran  along  the  ground,"  "  upon  man  and  upon 
beast,  and  upon  every  herb  of  the  field,  throughout  the  land  of 
Egypt,"  "  and  the  hail  smote  every  herb  of  the  field,  and  brake 
every  tree  of  the  field.     Only  in  the  land  of  Goshen,  where  the 
children  of  Israel  were,  was  there  no  hail."     Pharaoh  begged 
to  be  spared,  but  directly  the  visitation  was  over,  his  heart  was 
hardened,  "  as  the  Lord  had  spoken  by  Moses."     Then  the 
Lord  sent  Moses  to  him  again,  premising,  however,  and  saying, 
"  I  have  hardened  his  heart,  and  the  heart  of  his  servants,  that 
I  might  show  my  signs  before  him  ;    that  ye  may  know  that 
I  am  the  Lord."     After  this  locusts  were  threatened,  which 
should   eat  up  all  that  had  escaped  the  hail.      Pharaoh  then 
said  that  they  might  go,  but  asked  who  were  to  go.      Moses 
said,   all   must  go,  old   and  young,  with  all  their  flocks  and 
herds,  to  "  hold  a  feast  unto  the  Lord."     Pharaoh  said  the 
men  only  might  go,  and  then  drove  them  from  his  presence. 
The  locusts  accordingly  came,  and   devoured  every  green  thing 
that  remained  in  the  land.      Pharaoh  succumbed,  but  directly 
the  plague  was  removed  hardened  his  heart  again.     After  this 
darkness  was  sent,  "  even  darkness  which  maybe  felt."     "And 
there  was  a  thick  darkness  in  all  the  land  of  Egypt  three  days : 
they  saw  not  one  another,  neither  rose  any  from  his  place  for 
three  days  :    but  all  the  children  of  Israel  had  light  in  their 
dwellings."      Pharaoh  then  offered  to  let  all  go  but  the  cattle, 
but  Moses  insisted  that  "  not  an  hoof"  should  "  be  left  behind," 
saying  these  were  necessary  for  "  sacrifices  and  burnt  offerings, 
that  we  may  sacrifice  unto  the  Lord  our  God."     Pharaoh,  how- 
ever, again  got  hardened,  and  said  he  would  kill  Moses  if  he 
troubled  him  with  his  presence  again.     On  this  God  told  Moses 
that  he  had  "  one  plague  more"  for  Pharaoh,  the  effect  of  which 
would  be  that  he  would  be  glad  to  get  rid  of  them,  and  would 
"  thrust"  them  out  "  altogether."     God  then  told   him,  pre- 
paratory to  this   exodus,  to   "  let   every  man   borrow   of   his 
neighbour,  and  every  woman  of  her  neighbour,  jewels  of  silver, 
and  jewels  of  gold  ;"  and  he  promised  to  favour  the  measure. 
After  this,  "  at  midnight,  the  Lord  smote  all  the  firstborn  in 


118 


MIRACLES. 


the  land  of  Egypt,  from  the  firstborn  of  Pharaoh  that  sat  on 
his  throne,  unto  the  firstborn  of  the  captive  that  was  in  the 
duno-eon  ;   and  aU  the  firstborn  of  cattle."     This  caused  a  great 
wailing  among  the  Egyptians, ''  for  there  was  not  a  house  where 
there  was  not  one  dead."     Then  Pharaoh  gave  the  Israelites 
leave  to   "  go  and  serve  the  Lord,"  as  they  had  said,  takmg 
with  them  their  flocks  and  herds,  and,  notwithstanding  all  that 
had  happened,  asking  Moses  and  Aaron  to  leave  him  their 
blessing.     The  people  were  off  immediately,  but  first,  "  accord- 
ing to'' the  word  of  Moses,  they  borrowed  of  the  Egyptians 
jewels  of  silver,  and  jewels  of  gold,  and  raiment :  and  the  Lord 
gave  the  people  favour  in  the  sight  of  the  Egyptians,  so  that 
they  lent  unto  them  such  things  as  they  required,  and  they 
spoiled  the  Egyptians."     They  thus  went  out  "  a  mixed  multi- 
tude," with  "very  much  cattle."      God  led  them  out,  showing 
them  the  way  with  a  pillar  of  cloud  by  day,  and  one  of  fire  by 
night.     He  would  not,  however,  take  them  "  through  the  way 
of  "the  land  of  the  Philistines,  although  that  was  near,"  being 
apprehensive,  should  "they  see  war,"  that  they  might  "return 
to  Egypt ;"  but  he  took  them  "  through  the  way  of  the  wilder- 
ness °of  the  Red  Sea."    God  thus  brought  them  to  the  sea-side, 
and  then  said,  "  I  will  harden  Pharaoh's  heart,  that  he  shall 
follow  after  them  ;  and  1  will  be  honoured  upon  Pharaoh,  and 
upon  all  his  host ;    that  the  Egyptians  may  know  that  I  am 
the   Lord."      Upon    this   Pharaoh   came   in  pursuit  with   his 
horses  and  chariots,  and  overtook  them.     Pharaoh  was  behind, 
and  the  sea  in  front,  and  the  Israelites  were   in  great  fear. 
Then  God  told  Moses  to  command  the  children  of  Israel  to  go 
forward,  and  to  lift  up  his  rod,  and  stretch  his  hand  over  the 
sea,  and  divide  it,  which  Moses  accordingly  did  ;  and  by  means 
of  a  strong  wind,  which  blew  all  night,  the  sea  was  thrown 
back,  "  and  the  children  of  Israel  went  into  the  midst  of  the 
sea  upon  the  dry  ground  :    and  the  waters  were  a  wall  unto 
them  on  their  right  hand  and  on  their  left."     The  Egyptians 
incautiously  followed,  but  in  some  way  God  "  took  off  their 
chariot  wheels,  that  they  drave  them  heavily;"    upon  which, 
by  God's  command,  Moses  stretched  forth   his  hand   over  the 
sea,  and  the  waters  returned   to   their  place   and   engulphed 
Phlraoh   and   all   his   host,  so  that  "there   remained  not  so 
much  as  one  of  them."     The  Israelites  were  then  led  into  the 


MIRACLES. 


119 


, 


wilderness,  and  kept  wandering  there  for  forty  years.  During 
this  lengthened  period  they  were  fed  with  manna  from  heaven, 
and  occasionally  water  was  drawn  for  them  out  of  the  rocks. 
All  this  time,  moreover,  their  "  raiment  waxed  not  old,"  neither 
did  their  feet  "  swell,"  nor  did  their  "  shoes  wax  old  upon  their 
feet."  And  after  this  long  pilgrimage,  Jordan  wa^  miraculously 
divided  for  them,  and  passing  across  its  dry  bed  they  entered 
the  promised  land. 

P.   Is  the  whole  of  this  wonderful  story  generally  believed  ? 

S.  It  is  so,  implicitly,  by  multitudes,  and  in  fact  is  viewed 
as  the  foundation  of  God's  dealings  with  the  Israelites  and  the 
corner  stone  of  their  faith. 

P.  You  surprise  me.  The  narrative  seems  to  me  to  team 
with  improbabilities,  and  at  every  turn  to  give  a  false  repre- 
sentation of  the  characteristics  of  God, 

S.  Please  then  to  state  your  objections  to  this  history. 

P.   It  seems  incredible  to  me  that  the  offspring  of  seventy  General 
men  should  have  mounted  up  to  two  or  three  milUons  in  four  cnticisms. 
generations  ;  that  after  Moses  was  satisfied  he  had  come  into 
personal  communication  with  God,  the  enactment  of  wonders 
before  him  was  considered  necessary  to  prove  to  him  what  God 
was  capable  of  doing  ;   that  while  he  must   have  been  aware 
of  the  promises  made  to  the  patriarchs,  and  that  the  set  time 
for  fulfilling  them  had  arrived,  and   found  himself  selected  as 
God's  honoured  agent  for  fulfilling  these  promises,  he  should 
then  have  attempted  to  evade  this  duty,  notwithstanding  that  God 
had  thus  specially  revealed  himself  to  him  in  power  ;  and  that, 
although  thus  selected  and  commissioned   for  this  important 
task,  God  should  have  waylaid   him  and  sought  to  kill  him  in 
an  inn,  but  was  turned   aside  from   this  purpose   by  his   wife. 
These  are  positions  so  much  at  variance  with  all   reasonable 
probability  that   I  cannot  think  they  belong  to   any  true  his- 
tory. 

Then  I  find  it  impossible  to  believe  that  God  would  cause 
sufferings  for  the  mere  purpose  of  displaying  his  power  ;  or 
that,  for  any  end,  he  could  deliberately  lay  such  plans  for  the  , 
destruction  of  Pharaoh  and  his  people  as  are  here  described. 
Before  any  message  is  sent  to  Pharaoh,  God  is  said  to  concert 
with  Moses  his  ruin.  He  says  he  will  send  the  message,  and 
then   harden   Pharaoh's   heart   that   he   may  disobey  it,  upon 


sS«a**iswfa«ap«i4Si«p**s»®t***SS«^ 


120 


MIEACLES. 


which  he  will  proceed  to  punish  him  without  mercy  ;  and  that 
such  was  the  process  is  carefully  explained,  stage  by  stage, 
through  all  these  horrible  visitations ;  and  even  if  Pharaoh  had 
been  in  wilful  resistance,  why  should  so  many  innocent  persons, 
and  harmless  animals,  have  been  involved  in  suffering  because 
of  his  guilt  ?  In  the  last  act  of  killing  off  the  first-born,  every 
family^in  the  land  was  struck  at,  the  blow  falling  even  upon 
the  poor  helpless  prisoners  in  the  dungeons.  These  cannot 
have  been  the  acts  of  God.  Some  man,  ignorant  of  what  God 
really  is,  must  have  concocted  the  tale,  thinking  to  magnify 
the  importance  of  his  own  people  by  alleging  such  marvellous 
interventions  in  their  favour. 

Then  Moses,  in  going  with  God's  message  to  Pharaoh,  goes 
really  with  a  lie  in  his  mouth.     The  object  in  view  is  a  final 
evacuation  of  Egypt,  to  settle  nationally  in  another  land  ;  and 
yet  he  pretends  that  he  merely  wants  a  few  days  leave  for  the 
people,  to  take  them  out  into  the  wilderness  to  sacrifice  to  God  ; 
adding  the  further  falsehood,  that  this  was  to  avert  the  wrath 
of  God,    "  lest  he   fall   upon   us  with  pestilence,  or  with  the 
sword."'    And  this  misrepresentation  is  kept  up  throughout  the 
whole  ordeal.     The  movement  contemplated  was  a  most  impor- 
tant one.     Pharaoh  had  to  part  with  a  host  of  bondsmen,  who 
represented  so  much  property  inherited  by  him  from  his  prede- 
cessors.     Compensation,  especially  from  the  inexhaustible  trea- 
sury of  God's  bounty,  might  have   been  offered   him.      The 
British   Government,  for  instance,  in  liberating  a  number  of 
Africans  who  were  in  slavery,  did  so  by  means  of  a  very  heavy 
payment.      At  all  events,  Pharaoh  should  have  been  told  that 
this  was  a  movement  which  God  had  long  before  ordained,  and 
was  determined  to  accomplish,  and  as  special  hardening  of  his 
heart  was  resorted  to  in  order  to  ensure  his  resistance,  it  is 
fair  to  suppose  that  he  might  have  proved  compliant,  had  he 
been  left  to  himself,  and  matters  been  put  before  him  in  their 
true  light.      But  what  was  he  to  make  of  the  pretence  of  a 
whole  host  of  people,  including  women  and  children,  and  every 
head  of  cattle  they  possessed,  wanting  to  go  out  three   days 
journey  into  the  wilderness  to  sacrifice  ?    The  poor  man  actually 
said  that  they  might  sacrifice  where  they  were,   but   this  was 
not  agreed  to.      He  could   but  see  that  the  proposition  was  a 
mere  device  to  overreach  him,  and   his  resistance,   even  had 


If 


V 


MIRACLES. 


121 


his  heart  not   been  subjected  to  special  hardening,  was  but 

natural. 

Then,  in  keeping  with  this  duplicity  practised  upon  Pharaoh, 
was  the' expedient  of  taking  valuables  from  his  people,  on  the 
pretence  of  borrowing  them,  when   there  was  no  intention  of 
returning  what  was  so  borrowed.      And  this  fraud  is  made  a 
subject  of  glorification,  and  called    *'  spoiling  the  Egyptians." 
A   human  judge  would  visit  such   an  act  with  severe  conse- 
quences, and  a  divine  one  cannot  have  had  an  obtuser  sense 
of  right   and    wrong.      But  God    is  said  not  merely  to  have 
count^'enanced  this  fraud,  but  to  have  counselled  and  effectuated 
it.      He  is  represented  at  one  time  to  be  hardening  Pharaoh's 
heart  so  as  to  make  him  a  transgressor,  and  at  another  to  be 
softening  the  hearts  of  his  people  that  they  might  become  the 
victims  of  spoliation.     It  is  impossible  for  me  to  believe  that 
such  action  as  this  came  from  God. 

I  observe,  further,  that  on  Pharaoh's  first  refusal  to  let  the 
people  go,  Moses  does  not  hesitate  to  reproach  God  with  the 
failure.  How  is  this  to  be  reconciled  with  the  alleged  plot  laid 
between  God  and  Moses,  that  Pharaoh's  heart  should  be  har- 
dened in  order  that  he  might  so  refuse,  and  then  reap  the 
consequences  ?  Moreover,  is  it  likely  that  a  human  bemg 
would  venture  thus  to  reproach  God,  especially  such  a  God  as 
this  who  had  just  before  aimed  at  his  life,  without  note  or 
warning,  at  the  inn  ?  And  when  God  repeated  his  orders, 
would  he  still  demur?  Moses  appears  to  me  to  have  been  far 
more  rebellious  than  Pharaoh. 

Then  God  is  said  to  have  made  Moses  a  god  to  Pharaoh. 
What  this  may  mean  I  am  at  a  loss  to  think.      How  was 
Moses  to  influence  Pharaoh,  especially  when  God  was  harden- 
ing him  to  resistance  ?  ^  ^  3 
Nor  can  I  understand  how  God   should  have  condescended 
to  enter  into  competition  with  Pharaoh's  magicians,  nor  how 
the  contest  should  for  a  time  have  been  perfectly  equal.      Are 
we   to   believe  that  these   men   could  exercise  divine  power, 
namely,    in   converting   one   substance    into   another,    and   in. 
creating  animal  life  ?     And  if  we  are  to  reject  their  wonders 
as  unreal,  what  is  to  prevent  our  rejecting,  as  equally  unreal, 
the  marvels  opposed  to  theirs  ?      Neither  can  I  understand  the 
subsequent  failure  of  the  magicians.      If  they  could  call  frogs 


Further 
criticisms. 


122 


MIRACLES, 


into  existence,  why  should  they  not  have  been  able  to  create 
the  far  more  insignificant  objects,  lice  ? 

There  are  also  some  features  of  detail  which  seem  to  me  to 
indicate  oversight,  and  so  to  show  this  to  be  a  made  up  story. 
If  Aaron  changed  all  the  waters  of  Egypt  into  blood,  where 
was  there  any  for  the  magicians  to  operate  upon  ?  And  if  all 
the  cattle  of  the  Egyptians  were  killed  by  the  murrain,  how 
could  there  be  any  to  be  dealt  with  by  the  boils,  the  hail,  and 
at  the  slaughter  of  the  firstborn  ?  And  how  could  Pharaoh 
have  found  the  means  of  horsing  those  chariots  with  which  he 
pursued  the  Israelites  ? 

Then  if  the  Israelites  were  anxious  to  be  off  into  the  wilder- 
ness at  any  hazard,  and  ready  to  go  at  a  moment's  notice,  why 
did  they  not  decamp  when  not  a  man  of  the  Egyptians  could 
put  foot  to  ground  because  of  the  boils,  or  when  they  were  in- 
volved in  such  profound  darkness  that  not  one  could  move  from 
his  place  for  three  days  ? 

S. — I  admit  that  what  you  say  is  well  worthy  of  considera- 
tioQ  in  weighing  the  probabilities  of  this  history. 

P. — Perhaps  there  maybe  more  objections  of  the  sort  which 
have  occurred  to  others. 

S. — There  are.  Bishop  Colenso's  first  volume  is  greatly 
occupied  with  the  subject,  which  has,  in  fact,  engaged  the 
attention  of  many  before  him.  I  will  give  you  a  brief  idea  of 
the  objections  generally  urged  to  the  credibility  of  this  nar- 
rative. Pharaoh  was  always  changing  his  mind,  at  one  time 
refusing  the  Israelites  liberty  to  go,  at  another  yielding, 
seemingly,  when  under  the  pressure  of  the  plagues  with  which 
he  was  visited.  When  therefore  he  finally  said  they  might  go, 
no  time  was  to  be  lost  in  acting  upon  the  permission.  There 
was  a  certain  ceremonial  appomted  at  this  time,  namely,  the 
passover.  Lambs  were  to  be  sacrificed,  and  the  blood  thereof 
put  upon  the  door  posts,  seeing  which  the  avenging  angel  was 
to  pass  over  the  house  and  strike  at  the  Egyptians  who  would 
be  without  such  precaution.  The  people  were  to  partake  of 
the  lamb,  and  to  eat  it  with  their  "  loins  girded,"  their  '*  shoes 
on  their  feet,"  and  their  staves  "in  their  hand,"  ready  for  an 
instant  march.  At  midnight  the  blow  was  struck.  Pharaoh 
sent  for  Moses  and  Aaron  at  once,  during  the  night,  and  told 
them  to  take  the  people  away,  and  the  Egyptians  urged  them 


MIRACLES. 


123 


to  go  "  in  haste,"  saying,  otherwise  "  We  be  all  dead  men.' 
Accordingly  the    people   "took    their   dough    before    it   was 
leavened,"  packed  up  their  kneading  troughs  "  in  their  clothes 
upon  their  shoulders,"  and  took  their  departure  on  the  instant ; 
finding  time,  however,  to  plunder  the  Egyptians  by  "  borrow- 
in-  "  as  the  term  used  is,  their  valuables.      Now  it  is  objected 
thtt  a  population  of  two  or  three  millions,  including  persons  of 
both  sexes  and  of  all  ages,  could  not  have  been  got  off  in  this 
rapid  manner,  in  the  dead  of  night,  without  method,  organisa- 
tion, or  consumption  of  time.      They  were,  it  seems,  provided 
with   tents  (Ex.    xvi.   16).      "  How  goodly  are  thy  tents,  O 
Jacob    and  thy  tabernacles,  0  Israel !"  exclaimed  Balaam,  at 
an  early  stage  of  their  marchings,  as  he  saw  the  hosts  of  the 
Israelites  spread  out  before  him  on  the  plains  of  Moab  (Num. 
xxiv   6)      And  for  such  equipage  what  carriage  had  they,  it  is 
asked,  seeing  they  had  to  transport  even  their  kneading  troughs 
on  their  own  shoulders.     They  are  said  to  have  gone  out  "  har- 
nessed "  an  expression  having  no  intelligible  meaning,  but  that 
they  were  armed  for  war,  in  which  sense  the  phrase  is  used 
elsewhere  (1   Ki.  xx.  11);  and  they  are  found  shortly  after 
leaving  Egypt  engaged  with  the  Amalekites  whom  they  dis- 
comfited "  with  the  edge  of  the  sword."      "  God  brought  him 
forth  out  of  Egypt,"  said  Balaam,  viewing  their  material  force  ; 
"  he  hath  as  it  were  the  strength  of  an  unicorn :  he  shall  eat 
up  the  nations  his  enemies,  and  shall  break  their  bones    and 
pierce  them  through   with  arrows"   (Num.  xxiv.  8).     Being 
hitherto  bondsmen,  how,  it  is  asked,  could  they  have  thus  be- 
come suddenly  a  well  appointed  army  1     Admitting  that  there 
was  water  here  and  there  on  the  route,  yet  the  general  character 
of  the  scene  of  their  wanderings  was,  what  it  now  is,^  an  and 
desert      It  is  called  a  "  great  and  terrible  wilderness,"   a  place 
of  "drought,"  and  "where  there  was  no  water,"  a  "desert 
land"  a  "waste  howling  wilderness"  (Deut.  i.  19;   viii.  lo  ; 
xxxii  10)  ■  "a  land  of  deserts  and  pits,  a  land  of  drought,  and 
of  the  shadow  of  death,  a  land  that  no  man  pa.ssed  through 
and  where  no  man  dwelt"  (Jer.  ii.  C).      Here  they  were  kept 
forty  years,  and  had  to  make  lengthened  halts,  it  might  be  for 
a  year  at  a  time  (Num.  ix.  22).     It  was  a  place  so  destitute 
of  natural  resources  that  the  people  had  to  be  fed  with  daily 
supplies  of  manna  from  heaven,  and  their  garments  had  to  be 


124 


MIRACLES. 


preserved  to  them  miraculously  without  need  of  ren ovation. 
They  had  numerous  flocks  and  herds  with  them.      How  were 
these  supplied  with  pasturage  and  water  ?     How  also  was  fire- 
wood  obtainable   for  cooking,  or  for  warmth  in  the  winters, 
which  in  those  regions  are  severe  ?     The  deserts  are  always  in 
extremes  of  heat  and  cold,  and  I  myself  can  say,  from  personal 
knowledge,  that  ice  forms  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Baghdad. 
And  in  this  desert  place  the  Israelites  had  to  construct  a  move- 
able temple,   or  tabernacle,  of  gorgeous  materials.      It  was  to 
consist  of  embroidered  curtains,  made  of  fine  linen,  coloured 
blue,  purple,  and  scarlet ;  over  which  was  to  be  a  covering  of 
dyed  rams'  skins ;   and  above  that  one  of  badgers'  skins  ;   and 
there  were  to  be  similar  hangings  for  the  veil,  the  entrance, 
and  the  outer  court.     The  whole  was  to  be  secured  with  boards, 
bars,  and  posts,  overlaid  with  gold,  and  adjusted  together  with 
silver   sockets.      The    ark,    the   mercy-seat,    with    its   winged 
cherubim,  the  table  for  the  shewbread,  with  its  various  utensils, 
the  seven  branched  candlestick,  with  its  furniture,  and  the  altar 
for  burning  incense,  were  all  to  be  overlaid  with  gold.      The 
sacrificial  altar  and  its  utensils  were  to  be  of  brass.     The  priest 
was  to  be  splendidly  attired  in  fine  linen,  with  decorations  of 
gold  and  precious  stones.     Where,  and  how,  it  is  asked,  could 
such  costly  and  refined  materials  be  obtained  and  put  together 
by  this  fugitive  people  in  a  waste  and  howling  wilderness  ? 

P. — Certainly  those  seem  to  be  insurmountable  obstacles  to 
the  reception  of  the  story. 
The  course  I  observe  that  God  is  said  to  have  led  the  Israelites  by  a 
Sea*^^  ^^^  round  about  way  in  order  that  they  might  not  come  in  contact 
with  the  Philistines.  Was  it  owing  to  this  measure  that  they 
got  upon  the  wrong  side  of  the  Red  Sea,  so  as  to  require  that 
a  passage  through  the  sea  should  be  made  for  them  ? 

S.  No.  The  course  they  had  to  hold  from  Goshen  to  get 
to  the  wilderness,  whither  God  was  leading  them,  was  a  south- 
easterly one.  Had  they  kept  thereto,  they  would  have  cleared 
the  Gulf  of  Suez,  which  was  the  arm  of  the  Red  Sea  that  pre- 
sented itself  to  them,  but  by  bearing  away  a  little  too  much 
to  the  westward,  they  got  upon  the  wrong  side  of  the  sea,  just 
a  few  miles  down  its  western  bank.^     The  Philistines  lay  in 

^  See  Map,  onwards. 


MIRACLES. 


125 


quite  a  different  direction,  namely,  to  the  north-east  on  the 
shore  of  the  Mediterranean. 

P.  Then  in  respect  of  avoiding  the  Philistines  it  was  of  no 
importance  whether  the  Israelites  went  to  the  west  or  to  the 
east  side  of  the  Red  Sea. 

S.  None. 

P.  It  would  seem,  then,  that  they  were  led  to  the  wrong 
side  of  the  Red  Sea  for  the  mere  purpose  of  having  a  passage 
opened  to  them  miraculously  through  it.  What  was  the  first 
hostile  opposition  that  the  Israelites  met  with  ? 

S.  Their  first  engagement  was  with  the  Amalekites.  S^Sf  Ama- 

P.  Where  did  this  occur  ?  ^       ^^^^ites. 

S.  When  they  had  made  a  few  marches  on  the  other  side 

the  Red  Sea. 

P.  But  I  thought  God's  design  was  to  keep  them  at  the 
outset  from  the  risks  of  war,  lest  they  might  be  discouraged 
and  turn  back  to  Egypt.  How  was  it  then  that,  foreknowmg 
of  course  all  things,  he  led  them  into  the  way  of  the  Amalekites. 

S.  That  I  cannot  explain. 

P.   How  did  it  fare  with  the  Israelites  when  they  did  battle 

with  the  Amalekites  ? 

S  Moses  made  Joshua  pick  out  men  to  engage  with  them. 
After  this  he  retired  to  the  top  of  a  hill  with  "  the  rod  of  God" 
in  his  hand.  All  then  depended  upon  his  holding  up  his  hand. 
"  It  came  to  pass,  when  Moses  held  up  his  hand,  that  Israel 
prevailed  :  and  when  he  let  down  his  hand,  Amalek  prevailed." 
Moses  at  length  became  tired  of  standing,  so  they  gave  him  a 
stone  to  sit  upon,  and  Aaron  and  another  held  up  his  hands 
till  the  Amalekites  were  thoroughly  beaten. 

p Might  not  the  same  expedient  have  been  adopted  with 

equal  success  had  the  Israelites  been  taken  by  the  direct  route 
supposing  they  had  there  fallen  in  with  the  PhiHstmes  and 
been  opposed  by  them. 

S. — Apparently  so.  ,  .    . 

p._Why  were  the  Israelites  detained  so  long  as  forty  years 

in  the  wilderness  ? 

S  — <rhe  land  they  were   to  take  possession  of  was  Canaan.  Spying  out 
When  they  approached  it,  Moses,  by  the  direction  of  God,  sent  *^^  ^^^  ' 
'  twelve  men,  one  from  each  of  the  twelve   tribes  of  Israel,  to 
spy  it  out  and  see  what  their  prospects  were.    These  returned, 


126 


MIRACLES. 


MIRACLES. 


127 


bringing  with  them  a  most  favourable  report  of  the  fertility  of 
the  land,  but  saying  that  it  was  full  of  fortified  cities  and  races 
of  gigantic  stature,  before  whom  they  appeared  as  "grass- 
hoppers." Two  out  of  the  twelve,  namely,  Joshua  and  Caleb, 
bade  them  however  not  to  be  disheartened,  saying  they  were 
quite  capable  of  overcoming  these  tribes.  The  Israelites  were 
nevertheless  discouraged,  and  wished  to  go  back  to  Egypt.  God 
then  condemned  them  to  wander  in  the  wilderness  for  forty 
years,  so  that  all  the  adults  of  that  generation  should  leave 
their  "  carcases"  there,  with  the  exception  of  Joshua  and  Caleb, 
who  alone  were  permitted  to  survive  and  enter  the  land. 

P. — I  can  understand  a  party  under  a  human  leader  sending 
forth  persons  to  reconnoitre,  but  what  occasion  could  there  be 
for  a  God-led  people  doing  so  ? 

S. — Certainly  there  could  have  been  no  real  necessity  for  the 
precaution. 

P. — And  if  it  were  thought  proper  to  depute  twelve  persons 
by  whose  report  the  people  were  to  be  influenced,  why  should 
they  have  been  considered  transgressors  when  they  were  governed 
by  the  voices  of  so  large  a  majority  as  ten  out  of  the  twelve  ? 

S. — That  I  am  unable  to  explain  to  you. 

P. — If  the  holding  up  of  Moses'  hand  with  "  the  rod  of 
God  "  in  it  had  proved  so  successful  in  the  case  of  the  fight 
with  the  Amalekites,  why  should  not  the  people  have  counted 
upon  the  same  resource  in  any  future  engagements  they  might 
have  ? 

S. — I  cannot  tell  you. 

P. — Was  such  an  expedient  ever  again  employed  ? 

S. — No,  never. 

P. — Had  the  sentence  of  turning  them  back  to  wander  in  the 
wilderness  till  they  died  off  no  effect  in  reclaiming  the  people  ? 

^. — It  had.  "  The  people  mourned  greatly,"  and  putting 
aside  their  fears,  offered  to  invade  the  land. 

P. — What  happened  upon  this  ? 

^, — Moses  endeavoured  to  deter  them,  but  some,  neverthe- 
less, made  the  attempt,  and  got  beaten  by  the  Canaanites. 

P. — This,  then,  would  serve  to  show  that  they  were  warranted 
in  their  first  apprehensions. 

S. — The  difference  is  this.  When  God  said  he  would  be 
with  them  and  give  them  success,  they  were  afraid  of  results. 


and  when  told  that  God  would  not  be  with  them  they  made 

the  venture. 

P. That  certainly  was   most   extraordinary  conduct.      It  F^^^y^fi" 

appears  that  at  the  outset,  when  the  Israelites  had  to  leave  derness. 
Egypt,  God  was  apprehensive  that,  notwithstanding  his  pur- 
pose of  leading  them  forward,  they  might  turn  back  to  Egypt, 
if  they  fell  in  with  the  Philistines.  What  prevented  their  so 
turning  back,  when  thus  minded  on  receiving  the  report  of  the 
spies,  and  in  lieu  of  remaining  to  rot  in  the  wilderness. 

S. — That  I  cannot  tell  you. 

p. — Perhaps  they  were  afraid  of  disobeying  God. 

S, On    the   contrary,  they  proved    themselves  to  be  "a 

stubborn  and  rebellious  generation"  (Ps.  Ixxviii.  8)  ;  and  dur- 
ing the  whole  forty  years  "  God  was  grieved  with  this  genera- 
tion "  (Ps.  xcv.  10).  Moses'  testimony  against  them  at  the 
end  of  the  wanderings,  just  when  they  were  about  to  pass  into 
the  promised  land,  was,  "  From  the  day  that  thou  didst  depart 
out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  until  ye  came  unto  this  place,  ye  have 
been  rebellious  against  the  Lord  "  (Deut.  ix.  7). 

p. Could  it  be  that  they  did  not  dare  to  move  about  in 

such  a  place  without  the  guidance  of  the  pillar  of  cloud  and  of 
fire,  which,  of  course,  would  not  show  them  the  way  back  to 

Egypt  ? 

^. It  cannot  be  said  that  they  were  thus  dependent.  Not- 
withstanding the  provision  said  to  have  been  made  for  them  in 
the  pillar  of  cloud  and  of  fire,  they  appear  to  have  looked  to 
obtaining  the  services  of  ordinary  guides.  They  had,  for  in- 
stance, at  one  time  with  them,  Hobab,  the  brother-in-law  of 
Moses,  a  man  of  those  parts,  namely  a  Midianite,  and  when  he 
was  about  to  quit  them,  Moses  said,  ''  Leave  us  not,  I  pray 
thee  ;  for  as  much  as  thou  knowest  how  we  are  to  encamp  in 
in  the  wilderness,  and  thou  mayest  be  to  us  instead  of  eyes  " 

(Num.  x.  31). 

p. Why  that  casts  discredit  altogether  upon  the  existence 

of  the  pillar  of  cloud  and   fire,  does  it  not  ?     They  could  not 
have  wanted  a  human  guide  if  they  were  aware  they  had  a  •  - 
divine  one." 

S. — Assuredly  not. 

p. — Possibly  then  they  did  try  to  force  their  way  back  to 

Egypt  and  were  hindered. 


128 


MIRACLES. 


OV»ject  of 
scheme  of 
occupation 
of  Canaan. 


Egyptian 
accounts. 


S. — Of  that  we  have  no  account.  In  fact,  there  is  scarcely 
any  note  of  their  proceedings  between  the  time  of  the  spies  and 
their  entrance  into  Canaan. 

P. — That  is,  of  the  forty  years  of  the  wilderness  journeyings, 
the  history  of  the  last  thirty-nine  is  a  blank  ? 

S. — Nearly  so. 

P. — Why  were  the  Canaanites  to  be  ejected  ? 

S. — Because  of  their  wickedness. 

P. — They  had  proved,   I  suppose,  even  greater  rebels  than 

the  Israelites. 

S. — That  can  scarcely  be  said,  seeing  that  they  had  never 
had  a  knowledge  of  God  or  of  his  commandments. 

P. — But  perhaps  the  Israelites  became  in  the  end  a  model 

people. 

S. — No.  Their  whole  history  shows  them  in  opposition  to 
God  and  his  ways,  guilty  of  idolatry,  bloodshed,  and  every 
abomination,  until  God  got  rid  of  them  by  ejecting  them  out 
of  the  land. 

P. — Then  the  whole  of  these  wonderful  manifestations  ended 

in  failure  ? 

S. —  Certainly  so,  if  judged  of  up  to  this  time. 

P. — Possibly  these  manifestations  acted  upon  the  Egyptians, 
the  great  sufferers,  and  brought  them  to  God. 

S. — This  might  certainly  have  been  expected,  for  in  one  of 
God's  messages  by  Moses  to  Pharaoh  he  was  told  that  one  aim  of 
the  plagues  with  which  he  was  visited  was,  '*  that  thou  mayest 
know  that  there  is  none  like  me  in  all  the  earth ; — that  my  name 
may  be  declared  throughout  the  earth."  But  the  fact  is  that  the 
Egyptians  never  were  brought  to  the  true  faith,  and  are  not  in 

it  even  now. 

P. — You  surprise  me.  What  a  waste  of  active  power  ! 
What  have  the  Egyptians  said  of  all  these  wonders  wrought  in 
behalf  of  the  Israelites  in  their  land  ? 

S. — Not  a  word. 

P. — Perhaps    they  were   an    ignorant    race,    and  kept  no 

records. 

S. — On  the  contrary,  they  were  the  most  enlightened 
people  that  existed  in  ancient  times,  and  very  careful  to 
chronicle  what  concerned  them. 

P. — Then,  of  course,  they  must  have  some  account  of  the 


MIRACLES. 


129 


Israelites  living  with  them  and  quitting  them,  if  there  is  any 
foundation  at  all  for  such  a  history.  What  may  they  have 
said  on  the  subject  ? 

;S'. The  Jewish  history  is  that  Joseph,  one  of  the  sons  of 

Jacob,  was  sold  by  his  brethren  as  a  slave,  and  was  carried  into 
Egypt;   that  he  there  interpreted   certain  dreams  of  Pharaoh 
the  king,  warning   him  that  there   would   be  seven  years  of 
plenty  and  seven  of  famine  ;  that  Pharaoh  consequently  made 
a  great  man  of  Joseph,  who  ruled  the  land  with  much  wisdom 
and  success  during  these  years,  storing  up  grain  in  the  years  of 
plenty  and  selling  it  in  the  years  of  famine,  and  so  handled  the 
resources  placed  at  his  command,  that,  finally,  all  the  cattle, 
and   all   the  land   of  Egypt,   became  the  king's,  upon  which 
Joseph  made  a  law  that  one-fifth  of  all  the  produce  raised  in 
the  country  was  to  be  the  king's  revenue.      It  was  at  this  time 
that  the  family  of  the  patriarch  Jacob,  to  the  number  of  the 
seventy  males  before  spoken  of,  are  said  to  have  migrated  into 
Egypt.    These  certainly  were  events  of  great  historic  importance, 
namely,  the  years  of  plenty,  the  years  of  famine,  the   rule  of 
the  foreigner  Joseph,  the  fiscal  arrangements  he  established, 
and  the  settlement  of  the  Israelites  who  afterwards  became  so 
vast  a  host.      But  of  all  this  there  is  not  a  vestige  in  the  Egyp- 
tian chronicles  ;  and  though  here,  and  at  other  times,  Pharaoh 
is  the  designation  by  which  the  king  of  Egypt  is  described, 
there  is  no  such  name,  or  designation,  in  the  very  copious  and 
ancient  records,    written  and    monumental,  of  the    kings    of 

Egypt. 

As  respects  the  exodus,  as  it  is  called,  of  the  Israelites  from  ^e 
the  land  of  Egypt,  there  are  some  accounts  by  the  Egyptian 
historian  Manetho  which  bear  on  the  subject.      He  was  high 
priest  in  the  time  of  Ptolemy  Philadelphus,  one  of  the  Greek 
rulers  of  Egypt,  and  drew  his  materials  from  inscriptions  and 
hieroglyphs  on  columns  set  up  by  Thoth,  one  of  the  ancient 
kings°     He  says  that,  in  the  time  of  King  Timaus,  men  from 
the  East,  of  an  ignoble  ra^e,  subdued  Eg}ipt   and  ruled  over  it 
without  incurring  hostilities;  that  this  tribe  were  called  Hyksos, 
or  shepherd  kings  ;  that  they  held  dominion  over  Egypt  for 
five  hundred  and  eleven  years,  oppressing  the  people,  destroying 
their  temples,  and  reducing  them  to  slavery ;   that  they  were 
at  length  attacked  by  the  kings  of  Thebais,  defeated,  and  driven 


Hyksos. 


130 


MIRACLES. 


into  a  place  called  Avaris  ;  that  there  they  were  besieged,  and 
capitulated,  and  were  allowed  to  withdraw  ;  and  then,  with  their 
families,  to  the  number  of  two  hundred  and  forty  thousand  in 
all,  and  with  the  whole  of  their  effects,  retreated  through  the 
desert  to  Syria,  and  in  that  country,  since  called  Judea,  built 

Jerusalem. 

Manetho  continues  to  say  that,  at  a  subsequent  period,  the 
then  King  Amenophis  desired   to  see  the  gods.      The   priest 
told  him  that,  to  have  his  wish  gratified,  he  must  cleanse  the 
country  of  the  lepers   abounding  in  it.      The  king  collected 
eighty  thousand  of  these  unclean  people,  and  sent  them  to  work 
in'' quarries  to  the  east  of  the  Nile.      The  lepers  asked  to  have 
allotted  to  them  the  city  Avaris,  left  vacant  by  the  shepherds, 
and  this  was  granted.      They  then  revolted,  and  chose  for  their 
ruler  a  priest  of  Heliopolis,  named    Osarsiph.      He  prohibited 
the  worship  of  the  Egyptian  gods,  and  told  his  people  to  slay 
and  sacrifice  the  animals  held  sacred  by  the  Egyptians ;   and 
he  sent  to  the  shepherds  at  Jerusalem,  who  had  formerly  been 
expelled  from  Egypt,  asking  them  to  come  to  their  aid.      This 
the  shepherds  did  to  the  number  of  two  hundred  thousand  men. 
The  King  Amenophis  retreated  into  Ethiopia.   The  new  comers 
oppressed  the  people,  as  the   former  Hyksos  had  done,   and 
Osarsiph  took  the  name  of  Moyses.      After  this,  Amenophis 
returned  with  a  great  force,  defeated  the  shepherds  and  the 
unclean  people,  and  pursued  them  to  the  bounds  of  Syria,  or 

Judea.^ 

p. — That  is  certainly  a  plain  piece  of  history,  free  from  in- 
comprehensible wonders  and  improbabilities.  What  are  the 
points  of  similitude  you  trace  between  this  account  and  the 
Bible  narrative  of  the  exodus  ? 

S. To  make  the  comparison,  we  must  put  the  two  occupa- 
tions by  the  Hyksos  together  as  if  one  story.  There  will  then 
appear  a  good  many  parallel  circumstances  in  their  history,  when 
in  Egypt,  and  that  of  the  Israelites.  The  original  Hyksos  are 
said  to  have  come  from  the  East,  to  have  been  an  ignoble  race 
of  shepherds,  and  to  have  obtained  dominion  without  force  of 
arms.  Just  so  is  it  said  of  the  Israelites.  They  were  shepherds 
from  the  East,  obtained  rule  through  Joseph  by  the  favour  of 
the  king,  and  became  so  powerful  in  numbers  that  it  was  feared 
1  Cory's  Ancient  Fragments,  171-173,  176-181. 


" 


MIRACLES. 


131 


they  would  domineer  over  the  Egyptians.     The  original  Hyksos, 
or  shepherds,   oppressed  the  Egyptians    and   destroyed    their 
temples,  and  became,   of  course,  hateful  to  them ;    and  when 
the  Israelites  came  to  settle  in  the  land,  Joseph  advised  them 
not  to  make  known   their  calling,  but  to  say  that  they  were 
dealers  in  cattle,  "  for  every  shepherd  is  an  abomination  to  the 
Egyptians "  (Gen.  xlvi.  34).       The  Hyksos  were  in  the  land 
several  centuries,  and  so  also  is  it  said  of  the  Israelites.      The 
unclean  people,  who  became  associated  with  the  later  Hyksos, 
were  put  by  themselves  to  the  eastward  of  the  Nile,  and  sub- 
jected to  forced  labour  on  the  quarries  as  bondsmen  ;  and  the 
Israelites  were  located  apart  in  Goshen,  which  was  to  the  east 
of  the  Nile,  and  there  held  in  bondage,  and  made  to  work  at 
brick-making.      Avaris,  where  the  Hyksos  took  post,  is  identi- 
fied by  the  Jewish  historian,  Josephus,  with  Goshen.^     The 
leader  of  the  unclean  people  was  a  priest  of  Heliopolis,  and  bore 
the  Egyptian  name  of  Osarsiph,  which  he  changed  for  Moyses. 
Joseph  bore  an  Egyptian  name,  Pharaoh  having  called  him 
Zaphnath-paaneah,  and  he  married  the  daughter  of  the  priest 
of  On  (Gen.  xli.  45),  which  place  was  afterwards  called  Helio- 
polis.^    The  name  Moyses,  stated  to  have  been  assumed  by  the 
aforesaid   leader,  identifies  him  absolutely  with  the  leader  of 
the  Israelites.      All  the  learning  of  the  country  centred  in  the 
priests.      Moses  was  brought  up  in  Pharaoh's  house,  and  ''  was 
learned  in  all  the  wisdom  of  the  Egyptians"  (Acts  vii.  22),  and 
was  himself   taken   to   be   an  Egyptian    (Ex.    ii.    19).      The 
leader  of  the  unclean  people,  though  educated  in   Egyptian 
tenets,  became  a  religious  reformer,  putting  down  the  worship 
of  the  Egyptian  gods,  and  using  in  the  sacrifices  he  enjoined 
animals  sacred  to  the  Egyptians.     And  so  Moses.     He  set  him- 
self against  the  Egyptian  idolatries,  and  inculcated  the  sacrifice 
of  the  bull  and  the  ram,  which  were  considered  holy  animals 
by  the  Egyptians.     The  early  Hyksos  were  allowed  to  withdraw 
peaceably  from  Egypt,  and  retreated  with  their  families  and 
all  their  effects  through  the  desert  to  Judea  where  they  founded 
Jerusalem.     The  unclean  people,  who  associated  themselves  with 
the  later  "Hyksos,  were  led  by  Moyses  in  the  same  direction. 
The  parallel  here  is  very  plain. 

p. — What  is  the  age  attributed  to  the  expulsion  of  the 

1  Higgins'  Anacalypsis  I.  56,  note.  '  Inman's  ♦•Ancient  Faiths,"  I.  64. 


132 


MIRACLES. 


Silence  of 
Egyptian 
records. 


early  Hyksos,  and  how  does  this  agree  with  the  time  ascribed 
to  the  exodus  of  the  Israelites  ? 

S. The  expulsion  of  the  early  Hyksos  is  thought  to  have 

been  about  B.C.  1450/  and  the  year  of  the  exodus,  according 
to  our  version  of  the  Bible,  was  B.C.  1490.  Prichard  considers 
the  times  to  correspond  within  a  year.^ 

p. Is  Manetho  a  reliable  author,  and  how  have  his  writ- 
ings been  preserved  ? 

S. His  account  of  the   Hyksos  has  been  incorporated  by 

Josephus  in  his  controversy  with  Appion.  We  have  also  an 
extensive  table  of  Egyptian  dynasties  derived  from  him,  on 
which  all  students  of  Egyptian  history  more  or  less  rely. 
*'  The  recent  discoveries  of  M.  Mariette,  perhaps  the  ablest 
and  most  successful  of  all  explorers  in  the  valley  of  the  Nile, 
have  conferred  upon  ethnology  two  inestimable  boons.  First, 
he  has  opened  up  a  world  of  monuments  relating  to  a  part  of 
Egyptian  history,  about  which  we  knew  nothing,  and,  the  most 
interesting  of  all,  the  earliest.  And  secondly,  he  has  dispelled 
the  last  shades  of  doubt  which  hung  about  the  authenticity  of 
Manetho's  lists  of  kings."  ^ 

P. — What  does  Josephus  say  as  to  the  connection  between 
the  Hyksos  and  the  Israelites  when  in  Egypt  1 

^'. — Josephus  identifies  the  early  Hyksos  with  the  Israelites, 
but  throws  a  doubt  on  the  accuracy  of  the  second  narrative 
regarding  the  unclean  people.^  ''Josephus  and  Plutarch 
think  that  the  Phenician  shepherds,  said  to  be  driven  out 
of  Egypt,  were  the  Israelites."^ 

P. — And  in  the  well  kept  records  of  the  Egyptian  nation 
there  is  no  better  support  than  the  above  for  the  wondrous 
history  of  the  Israelites  in  Egypt  recounted  in  the  Bible  ! 

^_ — I  -vvill  give  you  some  passages  from  authors  who  have 
made  a  study  of  the  subject,  which  will  show  you  the  character 
of  the  Egyptian  records,  and  their  silence  on  this  head.  "  It 
is  for  the  three  great  Theban  dynasties — from  B.C.  1748  to 
B.C.  978,  that  the  architectural  remains,  especially  at  Thebes, 

1  Historic  Notes,  by  Samuel  Sharps,  89. 

^  Egyptian  Chronology,  81. 

3  Man's  Origin  and  Destiny,  by  J.  P.  Lesley,  145. 

*  Prichard's  Egyptian  Chronology,  68-70. 

■*  Higgins'  Anacalypsis,  I.  392. 


MIRACLES. 


133 


I 


are  so  abundant,  and  the  links  of  mutual  connection  so  numer- 
ous,  as  to  afford    something   like  a  continuous    monumental 
history,  while  the  temples,  palaces,  and  tombs  of  many  of  the 
kings  of  these  dynasties  are  on  so  vast  a  scale,  and  their  wars 
and  conquests,  and  tributes  recorded  are  so  considerable,  as  to 
strike  every  beholder  with  amazement.      The  Egyptian  chron- 
icles take  us  back  with  specific  details,  and  even  with  contem- 
porary monuments  and  inscriptions,  above   2000  years  before 
Christ ;   and  with  lists  of  names  manifestly  historical,  and  some 
well  marked  facts  200  years  higher."^      "  There  is  no  nation 
whose  people  have  been  more  careful   in  recording  the  daily 
and   yearly  events  which  happened  amongst  them  than  the 
Egyptians,  yet  neither  in  writing  nor  in  sculpture  is  there  any 
representation  of  the  seven   years  of  plenty,  when  the  cities 
were  stored  to  overflowing  with  the  effects  of  the  bounteous 
harvest,  nor  yet  of  the  years  of  great  famine,  when  the  people 
sold  all  they  had,  and  themselves  too,  for  bread  to  keep  them 
alive. — Having  thus  premised  that  the  Egyptians  did  not  shrink 
from  recording  their  own  misfortunes,  we  turn  to  their  remains, 
and  find  no  single  evidence  of  the  presence  of  such  a  ruler  as 

Joseph of  such  a  nation  of  slaves  as  the  Hebrews— of  a  king 

known  as  Pharaoh — of  such  calamities  as  the  various  plagues, 
nor  of  such  an  overthrow  as  the  destruction  of  an  army  in  the 
Red  Sea.  Even  Ewald,  with  all  his  learning,  is  unable  to  bring 
one  single  valid  witness  to  the  truthfulness,  or  even  the  proba- 
bility of  the  Mosaic  story."^  ''  How  very  extraordinary  a  thing 
it  is,  that  the  destruction  of  the  hosts  of  Pharaoh  should  not 
have  been  known  to  Berosus,  Strabo,  Diodorus,  or  Herodotus  ; 
that  they  should  not  have  heard  of  these  stupendous  events, 
either  from  the  Egyptians,  or  from  the  Syrians,  Arabians,  or 

Jews."' 

p. What  was  the  era  of  the  earliest  of  the  writers  you  have 

named  above  ? 

S. The  earliest  was  Herodotus,  who  is  so  looked  up  to  as 

to  be  called  the  father  of  history.      He  flourished  B.C.  450.* 

p. When    did  Manetho   write,    and  what   pretensions   in 

literature  had  Thoth,  from  whom  he  derived  his  materials  ? 

1  Egyptian  Chronicles,  by  W.  Palmer,  L,  xviii.  lii 

a  Inman's  Ancient  Faiths,  II.  95,  96,  346. 

8  Higgins'  Anacalypsis,  I.  633. 

•«  Palmer's  Egyptian  Chronicles,  I.  xlix. 


134 


MIRACLES. 


Miscel- 
laneous 
miracles. 


S. — Manetho  wrote  about  B.C.  276.^  Thoth,  according  to 
the  tables  of  Manetho,  (as  also  those  of  Eratosthenes,)  was  the 
son  of  Menes  the  first  of  the  historic  kings  of  Egypt.^  He 
was  deified  after  death,  and  called  Hermes  or  Mercury.  "  To 
this  Hermes  all  the  science  and  learning  of  the  Egyptians  were 
attributed.  He  taught  them  the  art  of  writing,  gave  them 
laws,  and  instructed  them  in  astronomy,  geometry,  medicine, 
and  other  sciences."^  Sanchoniatho,  a  still  earlier  historian, 
resorted  to  the  same  records  for  his  materials,  finding  them  laid 
up  in  a  town  called  Berytus.* 

P. — How  near  to  the  time  of  Manetho  was  Ezra's  promul- 
gation of  the  Book  of  the  Law  ? 

S. — That  is  said  to  have  occurred  B.C.  445,  or  about  170 
years  before  Manetho. 

P. — The  marvels  recounted  in  the  Bible  narrative  of  the 
Exodus  could  not  have  failed  to  attract  the  historians  of  these 
parts  had  they  really  occurred,  and  Josephus,  being  a  Jew, 
would  assuredly  have  supported  this  narrative  with  something 
better  than  Manetho's  account  of  the  Hyksos,  or  eastern  shep- 
herds, had  there  been  anything  else  discoverable  in  the 
Egyptian  Chronicles.  I  cannot  but  presume  that  the  Bible 
narrative  has  been  based  on  the  same  materials  used  by 
Sanchoniatho  and  Manetho,  and  that  the  writer  has  super- 
added his  astounding  marvels,  and  put  the  whole  into  the 
shape  he  has  adopted,  in  order  to  magnify  his  own  people 
and  show  them  to  have  been  special  objects  of  God's  favour 
and  protection.  - 

Let  us  pass  now  to  other  matters.  Were  there  any  results 
of  importance  from  what  was  done  in  regard  to  Gideon's  fleece, 
the  drought  caused  by  Elijah,  the  curing  of  Naaman,  the  pre- 
servation of  Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abednego,  and  the  mul- 
tiplying supplies  from  the  widow's  handful  of  meal  and  cruse 
of  water,  and  the  other  widow's  pot  of  oil  ? 

S. — None  that  I  can  particularize.  Gideon  had  received  a 
visit  from  "  the  angel  of  the  Lord,"  and  had  been  assured  that 
he    was    to  deliver  his  countrymen    from  the    oppression  of 


^  Palmer's  Egyptian  Chronicles,  I.  86. 
^  Cory's  Ancient  Fragments,  94. 
3  Prichard's  Egyptian  Mythology,  126,  127. 
*  Sanchoniatho,  by  Bishop  Cumberland,  42. 


MIRACLES. 


135 


If 


the  Midianites,  and  when  he  offered  up  a  sacrifice,  fire,  at  the 
touch  of  the  angel,  came  out  of  a  rock  and  consumed  it.      The 
Midianites  and  the  Amalekites  came  out  in  force.      Then  "  the 
spirit  of  the  Lord  came  upon  Gideon,"  and  he  blew  his  trumpet 
and  assembled  his  people.     At  this  time  he  sought  signs  from 
God  for  his  assurance  that  Israel  were  to  be  saved  by  him,  and 
he  proposed  that  a  fleece  he  had  by  him  should  at  one  time  be 
made  wet  with  dew,  and  at  another  preserved  dry.      This  seems 
to  have  been  altogether  a  private  testimony  to  Gideon.      The 
drought  by  Elijah  was  of  course  nationally  felt.      It  ended  in  a 
trial'^between  Elijah  and  the  priests  of  Baal  to  demonstrate 
with  whom  was  the  true  God  ;  and  this  terminating  in  Elijah's 
favour,  he  effected  the  slaughter  of  the  priests  of  Baal,  who 
numbered  four  hundred  and  fifty.      This,  however,  brought 
about  nothing,  for  the  next  event  recorded  is  that  Elijah  had 
to  flee  for  his  life  from  the  king's  wife,  Jezebel,  who  favoured 
the  worship  of  Baal.      The  preservation  of  Shadrach,  Meshach, 
and  Abednego,  led  to  a  proclamation  by  the  king  of  Babylon 
that  all  were  to  worship  the  God  who  had  delivered  them  ;  but, 
as  after  a  similar  order  issued  on  the  occasion  of  Daniel's  pre- 
servation in  the  lion's  den,  nothing  came  thereof,  the  people 
continuing  as  before  idolaters.      The  other  miracles  you  ask 
about,  namely,  the  curing  of  Naama.n,  and  the  replenishing  the 
stores  of  the  two  widows,  were  of  an  individual  character,  pro- 
ductive of  no  apparent  consequences. 

p. I  must  remark,  as  to  the  operations  with  Gideon's  fleece, 

that  they  are  of  a  sort  unworthy  to  call  down-  divine  agency  for 
their  performance,  and  that  it  is  inexplicable  how  such  ques- 
tionable and  insignificant  phenomena  should  have  impressed 
Gideon  with  the  reliability  of  the  message  communicated  to 
him,  when  the  more  important  manifestations  connected  with 
the  angel  had  failed  to  satisfy  him  on  the  head.  Gideon,  it 
appears  to  me,  should  rather  have  been  rebuked  for  his  distrust 
in  God  than  gratified  with  the  experiments  demanded  by  him. 

I  notice  a  good  many  instances  of  the  acceptance  of  sacri-  Celestri 
fices  demonstrated  by  fire  sent  from   heaven  which  consumed  ^;^^^- 
the  offerings.      It  was  so  in  the  case  of  Aaron,  of  Gideon,  of  sacnfice.. 
Manoah,  of  Elijah,  of  David,  and  of  Solomon,  and  supernatural 
fire  was  exhibited  also  at  a  sacrifice  of  Abraham's.     As  this 


136 


MIRACLES. 


Judgments 
by  celestial 
tire. 


Walls  of 
Jericho. 


Arresting 
course  of 
sun  and 
moon. 


happened  so  frequently,  did  the  converse  hold  that  a  sacrifice 
was  not  accepted  when  no  such  demonstration  was  made  ? 

S. — That  does  not  appear  so. 

-P. — Then  if  there  was  a  stated  priesthood,,  how  did  it 
happen  that  the  sacrifices  of  those  who  were  not  of  the  priestly 
order  were  marked  with  divine  acceptance  ?  In  other  instances 
the  divine  judgment  is  said  to  have  been  poured  out  upon 
transgressors  of  this  sort.  The  fire  from  heaven  should  have 
come  down  on  the  persons  of  Gideon,  Manoah,  Elijah,  David, 
and  Solomon,  in  lieu  of  upon  their  offerings.  It  would  seem 
either  that  there  could  have  been  no  special  ordination  of 
priests  in  those  days,  or  that  the  visible  acceptance  of  these 
sacrifices  must  be  a  fiction. 

S' — Certainly  there  would  seem  to  be  no  other  alternative. 

P. — On  various  occasions  fire  was  sent  down  to  destroy 
people,  making  the  exhibition  therefore  a  channel  of  wrath  as 
well  as  of  favour.  Fire  burnt  up  Sodom  and  the  cities  adja- 
cent. Nadab  and  Abihu  were  so  destroyed ;  so  also  a  number 
of  the  Israelites  in  the  wilderness,  and  the  two  hundred  and 
fifty  associated  with  Korah,  Dathan,  and  Abiram,  and  the  two 
companies  of  fifty  who  came  in  succession  after  Elijah.  Did 
these  marked  judgments  produce  any  results  on  the  survivors  ? 

S. — None  are  recorded. 

P- — The  walls  of  Jericho  fell  down  at  the  sound  of  trumpets. 
Was  this  expedient  used  again  by  the  Israelites  at  other 
sieges  ? 

S. — It  was  not. 

^ — Perhaps  the  greatest  wonders  recounted  are  when  the 
course  of  the  heavenly  orbs  is  disturbed.  This  is  said  to  have 
happened  twice,  and  upon  occasions  that  appear  to  me  quite 
unworthy  to  draw  forth  such  magnificent  demonstrations.  The 
first  was  in  the  time  of  Joshua,  when  the  Israelites  were  en- 
gaged with  the  Amorites.  The  enemy  had  been  defeated  in 
the  usual  way  by  force  of  arms,  and  were  flying.  Showers  of 
stones  then  came  down  from  heaven,  and  put  an  end  to  even 
more  than  had  been  disposed  of  by  the  swords  of  the  Israelites. 
One  would  think  that  would  have  sufficed  without  requiring 
that  the  sun  and  the  moon  should  stand  still  merely  that  the 
slaughter  by  the  sword  might  be  prolonged.  Perhaps,  how- 
ever, the  Amorites  were  to  be  exterminated  for  some  particular 


MIRACLES. 


137 


end.  The  other  occasion  is  a  still  less  important  one.  A  sick 
king,  in  progress  of  recovery,  wishes  to  know  whether  he  shall 
be  well  enough  to  attend  public  worship  in  the  course  of  three 
days,  and  is  allowed  to  ask  for  a  sign  Avhether  the  sun  should 
go  forwards  or  backwards,  and  by  which  he  is  to  know  if  his 
desire  is  to  be  fulfilled  ;  and  to  gratify  him,  the  whole  course 
of  nature  is  disturbed,  and  the  sun  put  back.  Who  is  to  be- 
lieve such  an  absurd  story  as  that  ? 

S. — It  is  in  the  Bible,  and  therefore  is  to  be  believed  with- 
out question.  As  to  the  Amorites,  I  am  able  to  answer  you. 
They  were  among  the  people,  respecting  whom  God  gave  the 
Israelites  the  command,  "  Thou  shalt  utterly  destroy  them" 
(Deut.  XX.  17).  Joshua,  perhaps,  thought  the  time  for  so 
doing  had  come,  and  thus  got  the  sun  and  the  moon  to  stand 
still,  in  order  that  he  might  accomplish  the  task.  But,  never- 
theless, it  was  not  fulfilled,  for  more  than  three  hundred  years 
afterwards  we  find,  in  the  time  of  Samuel,  the  last  and  the 
greatest  of  the  judge-rulers  of  Israel,  that  "  there  was  peace 
between  Israel  and  the  Amorites"  (1  Sam.  vii.  14). 

P. — That  is  certainly  very  surprising.  What  is  to  be  said 
of  the  value  of  God's  commands,  if  they  cannot  be  fulfilled  even 
when  such  extraordinary  means  were  taken  for  the  purpose  ? 
I  should  prefer  believing  that  no  such  commands  had  been 
given,  and  no  such  means  taken. 

There  appear  to  have  been  certain  material  objects  through  Urim  and 
which  communication  might  be  held  with  God,  and  his  direc-  &c!^°^^^^  ' 
tions  received.  These  were  the  Urim  and  Thummim,  what- 
ever these  may  have  been,  the  mercy-seat  on  the  ark,  the 
altar,  and  the  ei3hod.  What  instances  are  there  of  such  com- 
munication being  held,  and  with  what  ensuing  benefits  ?  The 
ark,  you  have  told  me,  has  disappeared,  and  in  Ezra's  time 
they  were  hoping  to  repossess  themselves  of  a  Urim  and 
Thummim.  The  brazen  altar  and  the  ephod,  I  presume,  are 
equally  not  existing. 

S. — There  are  no  particular  instances  recorded  of  the  use  of 
the  Urim  and  Thummim,  and  the  mercy  seat,  or  the  altar,  as  , 
channels  of  intercourse  with  God.  Of  the  use  of  the  ephod  in 
that  way  w^e  hear  but  once,  namely,  when  David  wished  to 
know  whether  he  was  likely  to  overtake  some  flying  Amale- 
kites.  The  material  objects  themselves  have  been  all  lost  long 
ago,  no  one  knows  how. 


138 


MIRACLES. 


MIRACLES. 


139 


Inquiring 
of  God. 


Micaiah. 


P. — I  cannot  think  that  there  were  such  appointed  channels 
of  communication  with  God  when  no  benefit  therefrom  was 
obtained,  or  even  sought  for,  so  far  as  the  accounts  go  ;  and  it 
is  incredible  that  the  implements  themselves,  considering  their 
alleged  importance,  should  one  and  all  have  disappeared  without 
a  record  to  show  what  had  become  of  them.  All  this  is  in 
keeping  with  the  Book  of  the  Law  not  being  forthcoming  for 
so  many  centuries,  and  the  only  conclusion  I  can  come  to  is 
that  the  absence  of  these  things  is  to  be  accounted  for  in  no 
other  way  than  by  supposing  they  had  no  existence.  Why 
also  should  there  have  been  four  such  channels  of  communica- 
tion when  one  would  have  sufficed  ?  And  when  we  turn  to 
the  next  section  of  marvels  you  have  noted  down,  we  hear  of 
the  communication  with  God  held  by  prophets  and  others, 
including  women,  and  even  by  those  who  were  transgressors 
or  without  knowledge  of  God,  such  as  Adam,  Eve,  Cam, 
Sarah,  Ahab,  and  the  king  of  Syria,  without  recourse  to  any 
such  material  instruments,  proving  no  such  instruments  to  have 
been  needed. 

Some  of  these  verbal  inquiries  of  God  appear  to  have  been 
resorted  to  on  very  insufficient  occasions,  as  when  David  asks 
how  he  was  to  get  at  the  Philistines  who  had  rallied  after  a 
defeat,  and  was  told  to  do  so  by  making  a  circuit  round  by 
some  mulberry  trees  ;  and  when  he  wishes  to  know,  after 
Saul's  death,  whether  he  was  to  show  himself  in  any  of  the 
cities  of  Judah,  and  then  in  which  of  them  ;  and  when  Saul 
was  missed  and  had  ^' hid  among  the  stuff."  Surely  the  ''in- 
quiring of  God  "  must  be  a  phrase  having  a  meaning  very  far 
short  of  the  import  of  the  words  themselves  when  it  is  used  in 
relation  to  such  unimportant  matters. 

The  contest  between  four  hundred  prophets  on  one  side,  and 
Micaiah  on  the  other,  in  the  case  of  Ahab,  has  a  good  deal  of 
unreality  about  it  in  my  eyes.  Why  should  so  many  as  four 
hundred  be  consulted  when  one  true  medium  was  all  that  was 
wanted  ?  Was  God  addressed  by  all  these  in  a  mob  ?  And  if 
they  all  agreed  as  to  the  answer  received  from  God,  what  could 
be  gained  farther  by  going  on  to  still  another  medium,  namely 
Micaiah  ?  Then  I  must  be  permitted  to  withhold  my  belief  to 
Micaiah  having  actually  seen  God  seated  on  his  throne  with  all 
the  host  of  heaven  around  him,  and  consulting  with  them  how 


1 


IS 


he  was  to  impose  on  Ahab,  and  then  accepting  the  services  of 
a  lying  spirit  who  volunteered  to  go  forth  for  the  purpose.  That 
is  obviously  a  scene  painted  up  by  one  who  had  very  unworthy 
conceptions  of  the  Divinity  and  his  ways.  Micaiah  proved  the 
true  prophet  as  respected  the  end  of  the  expedition  and  the  fate 
of  Ahab  ;  but  when  a  story  is  put  forward  with  such  obvious 
embellishments,  it  may  also  be  suspected  that  the  prediction 
was  made  true  by  being  written  after  the  event. 

As  to  the  famine  in  David's  time,  said  to  have  been  removed  1^^^^^^^  ^^ 
by  hanging  up  seven  of  Saul's  descendants,  I  am  quite  unable  grand- 
to  believe  that  God  countenanced  that  act.     When,  and  under  "" 
what  circumstances,  did  Saul  slay  the  Gibeonites?    How  can  two 
such  very  dissimilar  events  as  the  slaughter  and  the  famine  be 
connected  together  ?     Why  was  not  Saul  visited  for  his  own 
act  ?     Why  should  seven  suffer  for  one  ?     And  what  satisfaction 
could  God  have  in  the  cruel  and  ignominious  death  of  Saul's 
innocent  grandchildren  ? 

S. — I  cannot  gainsay  your  remarks  ;  and  as  to  the  hanging 
of  Saul's  grandsons,  I  have  no  explanation  to  offer.  Saul's 
slauo'hter  of  the  Gibeonites  is  not  recorded.  David  might  have 
looked  nearer  home  for  a  cause  for  the  famine,  supposing  it  to 
have  been  a  special  visitation  for  transgression.  Since  the 
time  of  Saul  he  had  been  guilty  of  his  great  crime  in  the  matter 
of  the  wife  of  Uriah,  and  he  had  treated  the  unhappy  Am- 
monites with  far  more  cruelty  than  Saul  could  have  displayed 
towards  the  Gibeonites.  Having  besieged  and  taken  their  city 
Kabbah,  "  he  brought  forth  the  people  that  were  therein,  and  put 
them  under  saws,  and  under  harrows  of  iron,  and  under  axes  of 
iron,  and  made  them  pass  through  the  brickkiln  :  and  thus  did 
he  unto  all  the  cities  of  the  children  of  Ammon  "  (2  Sam.  xii. 
31).  Moreover  his  act  of  giving  up  Saul's  descendants  for  sac- 
rifice was  a  very  treacherous  one,  being  in  violation  of  a  solemn 
oath  he  had  made  to  Saul  that  he  would  not  "cut  off  his  seed 
after  him"  (1  Sam.  xxiv.  21,  22). 

P. — What  a  monster! 

What  was  the  general  condition  of  the  Israelites  after  they  Fruits  to 
were  established  in  the  land  conferred  upon  them  ?    Was  it  one  their  access 
of  peace  and  prosperity,  with  the  recognition  of  God  in  all  their  ^^^^tod. 
ways,  as  might  be  expected  of  a  people  who  were  so  remarkably 
the  favourites  of  God,  and  who  had  him  to  resort  to,  direct 
their  forces,  and  guide  them  on  all  occasions  ? 


140 


MIRACLES. 


S. — Unfortunately  there  was  nothing  of  this  sort.  They  were 
commonly  steeped  in  idolatry;  surrounded  by  enemies  with  whom 
they  were  continually  at  war,  and  with  very  varying  success  ; 
torn  by  internal  dissensions,  ten  out  of  the  twelve  tribes  revolt- 
ing from  their  king  and  setting  up  a  rival  and  hostile  state, 
and  even  rival  worship ;  and  often  held  down  under  the 
dominion  of  oppressors,  such  as  in  early  times  the  Mesopota- 
mians,  the  Moabites,  Philistines,  Ccmaanites,  Midianites,  and 
Ammonites;  in  later  days,  the  Syrians,  Babylonians,  and 
Assyrians  ;  and  in  later  still,  the  Greeks  and  Romans ;  some  of 
whom  carried  them  off  bodily  into  captivity,  or  drove  them  out 
of  the  land.     At  present  they  are  under  the  yoke  of  the  Turks. 

P. — This  all  appears  to  me  most  incomprehensible,  and  not 
to  be  reconciled  with  the  idea  that  God  was  specially  associated 
with  this  people,  and  actively  engaged  for  them.  Their  direct 
intercourse  with  him  for  counsel  and  guidance  cannot  have 
obtained  when  such  were  the  dire  results. 
Dreams.  ^^w,  as  to  dreams,  I  have  been  much  surprised  to   see  it 

laid  down  so  broadly  that  when  a  man  is  in  "  deep  sleep," 
"  slumbering  upon  his  bed,"  this  is  a  time  when  God  ''  openeth 
the  ears  of  men,  and  sealeth  their  instruction."  I  cannot  con- 
ceive a  more  unreliable  medium  than  the  vagaries  of  the 
thouo-hts  at  a  time  when  reason  is  in  abeyance ;  thoughts  we 
know  that  are  influenced  by  a  man's  occupations  durmg  the 
day,  or  the  state  of  his  health. 

,S'. — You  are  certainly  supported,  not  by  common  experience 
merely,  but  by  another  part  of  the  scripture,  where  it  is  said, 
"  a  dream  cometh  through  the  multitude  of  business  ;  and  a 
fool's  voice  is  known  by  multitude  of  words. — In  the  multi- 
tude of  dreams  and  many  words,  there  are  also  divers  vanities: 
but  fear  thou  God."   (Ec.  v.  3,  7). 

P, — If  I  am  allowed  to  choose  between  conflicting  passages 
in  the  Bible,  I  much  prefer  abiding  by  the  one  you  have  last 
quoted.  Some  of  the  dreams  seem  to  me  of  an  unworthy  sort 
to  associate  God  therewith.  For  example,  that  connected  with 
Abimelech  and  Sarah  ;  Jacob's  dream  respecting  the  procrea- 
tion of  cattle  and  the  fraud  he  thereby  perpetrated  on  Labap ; 
and  Joseph's  dream  of  his  parents  and  brethren  bowing  down 
to  him.  If  the  latter  was  prophetic,  I  should  like  to  know 
whether  the  dream  was  fulfilled. 


MIRACLES. 


141 


] 


^.—Joseph  became  a  great  man  in  Egypt  and  exhibited 
himself  as  such  to  his  brethren.  So  far  the  dreain  may  be  said 
to  have  come  true.  That  his  father  humbled  himself  before 
him  was  not  the  case  ;  and  his  mother  could  not  have  done  so, 
as  she  died  even  before  the  occurrence  of  the  dream. 

p._Among  the  dreams  of  the  New  Testament  there  are 
some  connected  with  Herod  with  which  it  seems  to  me  singu- 
larly inappropriate  to  associate  God.  There  was  a  dream  to 
warn  the  wise  men  not  to  put  themselves  again  in  the  way  of 
Herod ;  another  to  tell  Joseph  to  flee  with  his  family  from 
Herod  to  Egypt,  and  to  remain  there  "  until  God  should  brmg 
him  word  ;"  a  third  to  tell  him  that  Herod  was  dead  and  that 
he  might  return  home  ;  and  a  fourth,  on  his  coming  there  and 
findin°  Herod's  son  enthroned  in  his  place,  to  intimate  that  he 
had  better  turn  off  to  Galilee.      Was  he  safe  as  to  this  last 

destination  ?  ,         i   ,-,  vi 

^_He  was   not.      Herod's  jurisdiction   embraced  Galilee 

also  and  his  kingdom  having  been  divided  amongst  his  sons 
after  his  death,  there  was  a  son  of  his  ruling  in  Galilee  just  as 
there  was  the  one  ruling  in  Judea.  Moreover,  he  would  have 
to  pass  through  the  whole  length  of  the  dominions  of  the  latter 
to  -et  into  Galilee,  unless  he  went  by  a  long  round  about  way 
through  the  deserts  on  the  other  side  of  ^Jordan,  which  is  not 
to  be  "gathered  from  the  statement  made.* 

p  —These  conflicting  and  misguiding  dreams  cannot  then 
possibly  have  been  revelations  from  God.  Then  there  is  that 
very  improbable  story  of  Pilate's  wife  troubling  him  when  on 
the  judc^ent-seat  about  a  dream  she  had  had  respecting  the 
prisoner  under  trial  before  him,  and  advising  him  to  acquit  the 
prisoner  on  the  strength  of  it.  Such  a  circumstance  as  that 
could  not  really  have  happened. 

I  turn  now  to  visions.  These  can  scarcely  be  discriminated  Vis,on«. 
from  dreams.  Some  of  those  in  the  New  Testament  relate  to 
matters  of  so  ordinary  a  nature  that  it  is  hard  to  believe  that 
God  can  have  stepped  out  of  his  usual  course  to  communicate 
directly  with  these  dreamers  on  affairs  of  this  sort;  as  when 
Cornelius  has  to  send  for  Peter;  when  Ananias  is  sent  to  Paul ; 
and  when  Paul  has  to  go  to  Macedonia,  or  to  prolong  his  stay 
in  Corinth.  The  miraculous  belongs  properly  to  grand  occa- 
1  Evanson'a  Dissonance  of  the  Four  Evangelists,  128,  129. 


142 


MTRACLES. 


Ministra- 
tions 
of  angels. 


sions,  not  to  current  incidents  of  the  day  ;  and  when  this 
element  is  introduced  at  every  turn,  we  may,  I  think,  attribute 
the  interventions  to  the  fancies  of  the  narrators,  rather  than 
look  on  them  as  based  upon  actual  occurrence. 

Then  there  are  visions  of  another  character,  such  as  those 
recounted  by  Ezekiel,  Daniel,  and  in  the  Apocalypse.  These 
to  my  mind  have  no  other  foundation  than  a  highly  excited 
imagination.  They  consist  of  descriptions  of  fiery  objects, 
sparkling  thrones,  creatures  of  monstrous  shapes,  huge  wheels 
covered  with  eyes  and  imbued  with  living  spirit,  &c.  The 
symbols  and  comparisons  are  all  drawn  from  earth,  and  there- 
fore not  likely  to  be  true  of  things  in  another  and  unrevealed 
sphere,  and  the  writers  appear  to  have  derived  their  ideas  the 
one  from  the  other.  That  this  is  the  case  as  respects  the  re- 
presentations of  the  Apocalypse,  you  have  already  shown  in 
tracing  its  close  resemblance  to  the  book  of  Enoch.  Enoch 
not  being  an  inspired  work,  the  writer,  of  course,  could  have 
had  no  such  visions  as  he  describes,  and  he  drew  his  imagery 
doubtless  from  Ezekiel  and  Daniel.  The  authenticity  of 
Daniel  is  disputed,  you  say,  and  it  becomes  the  easier  to  sup- 
pose that  the  source  of  his  descriptions  is  the  earlier  book  of 
Ezekiel.  Ezekiel  appears  extravagant  to  a  high  degree,  as  for 
instance  when  he  says  a  spirit  of  a  fiery  amber  colour  lifted 
him  up  from  earth  by  a  lock  of  his  hair,  and  transported  him 
to  various  places  on  earth  to  witness  what  was  going  on  there. 
This  sort  of  representation,  as  it  appears  to  me,  detracts  from 
the  reputation  of  the  Bible  as  coming  to  us  from  God,  rather 
than  supports  its  pretensions  to  be  a  divine  work. 

I  come  now  to  the  apparitions  of  angels.  They  are  repre- 
sented as  God's  messengers  and  ministers,  dispensing  his  favours, 
or  inflicting  his  chastisements,  as  it  may  be.  They  appear  to 
have  special  offices,  and  to  bear  names  as  human  beings  do. 
One  called  Michael  had  charge  of  the  interests  of  the  Jewish 
nation  ;  another,  called  Gabriel,  was  used  in  the  new  dispensa- 
tion. Then  one  was  attached  to  Persia,  and  another  to  Greece, 
and  these  seem  to  have  been  engaged  in  struggles  with  Michael, 
just  as  the  different  nationalities  they  represented  may  have 
been  engaged  on  earth.  This  seems  to  me  particularly  fanci- 
ful. Children  are  said  each  to  have  their  angels,  and  it  is 
inconceivable,  if  this  is  so,  that  adults  are  not  equally  attended. 


MIRACLES. 


143 


1 


But  what  is  this  but  to  substitute  the  providence  of  angels  for 
the  providence  of  God  ?     In  the  case  of  the  Israelites,  as  led 
out  of  Egypt,  this  is  distinctly  shown  to  have  been  so.     God  is 
even  made  to  say  that  they  were  a  race  so  stiff-necked  that  he 
could  not  trust  himself  with  them.      He  might  become  so  in- 
censed with  them,  that  in  a  heated  moment,  against  his  better 
judgment,  and  in  oblivion  of  his  promises  in  their  favour,  he 
might  suddenly  put  an  end  to  them.      He  thought  it  better, 
therefore,  to  put  them  under  the  calmer  temperament  of  an 
angel.     I  am  unable  to  accept  such  a  disparaging  view  of  God. 
I  believe  him  to  be  with  me,  as  with  all  his  creation,  and  not 
to  have  cast  off"  his  responsibilities  upon  others.      Then  I  see 
that  the   ethereal  spirit,  when  disengaged  by  death  from  its 
corporeal  tenement,  is  supposed  not  to  be  able  to  pass  to  its 
heavenly  or  spiritual  sphere  without  being  carried  up  there 
bodily  by  angels,    as   in   the    parable   of  the   rich   man    and 
Lazarus.      Angels  are  said  also  so  to  roam  about  this  earth, 
partaking  of  the  wants  of  human  beings,  that  in  entertaining 
those  we°receive  as  human  guests,  we  may  really  be  entertain- 
ing angels.      An  instance  is  given  in  the  next  section  of  appa- 
ritbns'of  God  when  Abraham  entertains  three  heavenly  visitants 
with  cakes,   butter,   milk,   and  veal.     Everywhere   I  observe 
earthly  attributes  made  to  characterise  objects  of  the  higher 
or  spiritual  sphere.      This  is  carried  to  a  degree  so  debasing  as 
to   represent   these  heavenly  beings   as   capable    of  inspiring 
sexual  passions   of  the  most  odious  description  in  the  human 
race,  and  as  possessing  such  feelings  themselves  towards  women 
of  earth,  even  to  the  actual  indulgence  thereof,  and  with  pro- 
lific results.      I  am  quite  unable  to  accept  as  really  true  tales 

of  this  sort. 

The  personality  of  a  malignant  spirit  such  as  Satan,  sup-  gatan. 
ported  by  subordinates  of  his  own  stamp,  seems  to  me  to  be 
the  offspring  of  the  same  imaginative  minds  which  have 
peopled  the  earth  with  angelic  beings.  One  sort  are  good, 
the  other  bad,  and  in  each  instance  the  mould  they  are  cast 
in  is  an  earthly  one.  The  evil  angels  are  confined  in  chains 
in  darkness.  Satan  is  bound  and  cast  for  a  specific  term  into 
a  pit,  or  dungeon,  as  a  human  criminal  might  be,  and  is  after- 
ward's,  with  his  attendants,  tormented  continually,  "  day  and 
night,"  with  *'  fire  and  brimstone,"  just  as  if  they  possessed 


144 


MIRACLES. 


Appari- 
tions of 
God. 


physical  frcames  like  ourselves.  I  must  coufess  these  ideas 
appear  to  me  most  childish.  Then  as  God  commits  the  reins., 
of  administration  so  frequently,  and  so  largely,  to  the  good 
angels,  he  appears,  even  much  more  absolutely,  to  have  aban- 
doned them  to  this  great  adversary  Satan.  Is  this  probable  ? 
Would  the  Creator  of  the  universe  abdicate  his  power  in  favour 
of  a  being  bent  on  undermining  his  authority  and  destroying 
his  works  ?  And  is  there  any  consistency  in  deputing  benefi- 
cent beings  to  watch  over  us  for  good,  and  evil  ones  to  work 
us  harm,  leaving  the  two,  when  they  meet,  to  fight  it  out  as 
they  can.  Thus  the  angelic  princes  of  Persia  and  of  Greece 
stand  opposed  to  the  Jewish  angelic  prince  Michael,  and 
Zechariah  sees  the  high  priest  Joshua  standing  before  the 
angel  of  the  Lord,  and  Satan  standing  at  his  right  hand  to 
resist  him.  All  this  speaks  to  me  of  human  invention  which 
has  no  better  form  to  give  to  spiritual  influences  than  an 
earthly  type.  Nor  can  I  at  all  accept  the  idea  that  God  has 
given  up  the  governance  of  this  earth  to  an  evil  being.  Every- 
where I  see  proofs  of  his  goodness  and  unceasing  care,  under 
the  operations  of  laws  framed  for  our  benefit,  which  are  as  true 
and  as  undisturbable  as  himself.  The  hazardous  conflicts  be- 
tween antagonistic  powers  of  another  world  I  certainly  have 
had  no  experience  of,  nor  can  I  conceive  that  they  enter  into 
God's  system  of  ordering  things  on  earth. 

These  writers  go  to  the  very  extreme  of  boldness  when  they 
venture  to  describe  physical  appearances  of  the  divine  being 
himself.  In  so  doing,  however,  they  cannot  get  beyond  forms 
and  constitutions  of  earth.  Jacob  meets  with  him  in  human 
shape,  and  wrestles  with  him,  and  proves  nearly  a  match  for 
him  ;  Moses  habitually  sees  him  face  to  face,  but  on  one  occa- 
sion nothing  but  his  "  back  parts"  are  exhibited  to  him  ; 
while  at  another  he  and  a  large  party  with  him  see  him  openly 
in  his  glory  ;  and  thus  he  is  described  in  Job,  and  displayed  to 
Micaiah,  Isaiah,  Ezekiel,  Daniel,  and  the  author  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse, enthroned  like  any  earthly  potentate  in  material  splen- 
dour. Jesus  is  declared  to  be  now  at  his  right  hand,  where 
Stephen  saw  him,  seated  with  God  on  his  throne,  until  he  may 
obtain  the  separate  throne  appointed  for  himself.  But  while 
these  large  demands  are  made  upon  our  credulity,  there  are 
corrective  declarations  in  this  very  record  itself  by  which  I 


MIRACLES. 


145 


certainly  prefer  to  abide.  God,  in  spite  of  all  these  startling 
descriptions,  is  recognised  to  be  "  invisible,"  one  "  whom  no 
man  hath  seen,  nor  can  see."  What  becomes  of  the  assertions 
that  he  has  been  repeatedly  seen  in  such  and  such  an  aspect  ? 
and  what  is  the  measure  of  dependence  to  be  placed  on  the 
word  of  those  who  declare  he  has  been  thus  seen  ? 

I  turn  now  to  the  wonders  wrought  by  Jesus  and  his  fol- 
lowers, and  I  confess  my  experiences  of  the  Hindu  tenets  ill 
prepare  me  to  accept  miraculous  exhibitions  as  satisfactory  de- 
monstrations of  a  divine  being  appearing  in  human  form.  I  am 
quite  unable  to  understand  of  Jesus  how  he  can  have  been 
the  "express  image"  of  that  which  is  absolutely  "invisible." 
However,  I  will  examine  some  of  his  works.  He  turned  water 
into  wine.      What  was  the  occasion  for  that  ? 

S. — Merely  to  promote  conviviality  at  a  wedding  fea^t. 
When  the  people  had  "  well  drunk,"  and  exhausted  the  supply, 
he,  in  this  way,  provided  them  with  more,  to  the  extent,  it  has 
been  calculated,  of  135  gallons.^ 

P. — This  does  not  appear  to  me  very  god-like.  Then  I  see 
that,  as  Elisha  had  done  on  a  smaller  scale,  he  fed  multitudes 
with  a  few  loaves  and  fishes,  who,  after  being  satisfied,  left, 
apparently,  in  fragments,  more  than  they  had  begun  with. 
That  must  have  impressed  his  followers  with  a  sense  of  his  vast 

resources. 

^. — One  would  have  thought  so.  The  demonstration  seems, 
however,  to  have  been  without  effect.  After  the  first  of  the 
miraculous  supplies,  on  a  second  similar  occasion,  when  Jesus 
proposed  to  feed  the  fasting  multitude,  the  disciples  queru- 
lously asked,  "From  whence  can  a  man  satisfy  these  men 
here  in  the  wilderness  ?  "  quite  immindful  of  the  ability  to  do 
so  he  had  already  exhibited.  And  finally,  on  mistaking  his 
allusion  to  the  leaven,  or  false  doctrine,  of  the  Pharisees,  for  a 
reproach  for  their  forgetting  to  bring  bread  with  them,  Jesus 
had  to  charge  them  with  an  utter  oblivion  of  these  successive 
miraculous  feedings.  "Do  ye  not  understand,"  he  said, 
"neither  remember  the  five  loaves  of  the  five  thousand, 
neither  tjie  seven  loaves  of  the  four  thousand  "  (Matt.  xvi. 

5-12). 

p. — When  I  see  results  so  inconsistent  with  the  dispby  of 

1  Hennell's  Inquiry  into  Origin  of  Christianity,  198. 


Water 
changed 
into  wine. 


Feeding" 
multitiKlos. 


star  Rid- 
ing wise 
meu. 


Tempta- 
tion of 
Jesus. 


146 


MIRACLES. 


such  miraculous  power,  I  cannot  believe  these  narratives  to  be 
founded  upon  actual  fact  The  discrepancies  look  to  me  like 
the  errors  of  a  writer  drawing  upon  his  imagination. 

I  cannot  understand  about  the  star  guiding  the  wise  men 
to  the  spot  where  Jesus  was  born.  People  would  be  considered 
foolish  now-a-days  who  set  out  on  a  long  journey  following  the 
movements  of  a  wandering  star,  if  there  is  such  a  thing.  Be- 
sides, why  should  the  star  have  taken  them  to  Jerusalem, 
where  Jesus  was  not,  and  there  have  left  them  to  make  ordi- 
nary inquiry  as  to  where  it  was  he  was  to  be  met  with?  and 
when  through  such  means  they  had  learned  that  they  were  to 
look  for  him  in  Bethlehem,  what  need  was  there  for  the  star 
to  re-appear  for  their  guidance  ?  And  how  is  it  possible  for 
an  object  so  remote  as  a  star,  which  would  be  visible  in  tiie 
same  spot  to  observers  Imndreds  of  miles  away  from  one  another, 
to  have  actually  pointed  to  the  very  house  where  Jesus  lay  ? 
The  story  appears  to  me  too  full  of  inconsistencies  to  be  other- 
wise than  unreal. 

The  account  of  the  temptation  of  Jesus  involves  of  course 
the  existence  of  Saltan  and  his  bodily  presence  on  eartk  I 
thought  Jesus  was  Godi  How  could  he  be  driven,  -without  his 
own  volition,  into  the  wilderness,  there  to  be  with  the  wild 
beasts  fasting  for  forty  days,  and  after  this  subjected  to  the 
temptations  of  the  devil  ?     Was  he  really  tempted  ? 

S, — Apparently  he  was  habitually  liable  to  temptation,  just 
as  ourselves.      He  "  was  in  all  points  tempted  like  as  we  are  " 

(Heb.  iv.  15.) 

P. — That  I  can  well  -understand,  viewing  him  as  a  man. 
But  what  became  of  his  Godhead  ?  That  should  have  plaeed 
him  beyond  the  sense  of  any  temptation.  To  be  tempted,  I 
understand  to  mean  to  be  brought  to  a  point  when  it  becomes 
a  question  to  yield  to  something  seductive,  or  not  to  yield,  I 
could  not  tempt  a  rich  man  with  a  penwy,  or  a  man  satisfied 
after  a  sumptuous  feast  with  a  piece  of  dry  bread.  Tlien  with 
what  could  God,  the  creator  and  possessor  of  .all  things,  be 
really  tempted  ?  The  instances  you  have  given  me  K^f  the  devil's 
attempt  upon  Jesus  seem  to  me  ludicrous,  if  to  be  viewed  as 
exposing  him  to  any  actual  temptation.  He  was  to  throw 
himself  off  the  pinnacle  of  the  temple  U  see  how  God's  angels 
would  hold  him  up;  whereas,  if  himself  God,  he  would  need 


MIRACLES. 


147 


no  other  support  than  his  own  power.      He  had  walked  on 
water,  and  could  of  course  float  on  air.      Then  of  what  value 
to  him  were   ''  all  the  kingdoms  of  the  world,"    supposing   it 
possible  that  from  the  top  of  any  mountain  he  could  have  been 
shown  them,  all  round  the  globe,   "  in  a  moment  of  time,"  as 
stated?     As  a  devotee,  in  his  mere  human  capacity,  earthly 
glory  would  present  no  attraction  to  him,  and,  as  God,  it  is  a 
mere  mockery  to  suppose  that  he  could  have  the  offer  of  such 
an  evanescent  object  seriously  made  to  him.     And  the  return 
expected  was  no  less  than  that  he  should  overthrow  the  whole 
course  of  his  own  constitution,  and  rule,  and  worship  the  arch- 
enemy, he,  as  God,  knowing  him  well  to  be  such !     Then  there 
are  the  same  passages  of  a  human  body,  spirit-borne,  through 
the  air,  first  to  a  pinnacle  of  the  temple,  and  then  to  the  top 
of  "  an  exceeding  high  mountain,"   as  occurred  to  Ezekiel  in 
vision.      Are  we  to  take  such  a  statement  as  this  as  founded 
on  actual  fact  ?     The  writer  appears  to  me  throughout  to  have 
been  drawing  upon  his  imagination,  and  to  have  presented  us 
after  all  with  an  unreal,  or  only  mock  temptation. 

Can  you  tell  me  what  lesson  was  inculcated  by  the  cursing  ^^^^® 
of  the  fig  tree  ?  I  cannot  understand  how  any  man  could  ex- 
pect to  find  figs  fit  to  satisfy  his  hunger  on  at  the  wrong  season 
for  the  fruit ;  much  less  how  a  man,  who  was  God,  could  fall 
into  such  a  mistake  ;  and  the  act  of  cursing  an  unconscious 
plant,  whether  it  was  the  time  for  figs  or  not,  seems  to  me  so 
petty,  and  so  silly,  as  to  be  ascribable  only  to  a  lunatic. 

S. The  cursing  the  fig  tree  appears  to  have  been  merely  an 

occasion  taken  by  Jesus  to  display  his  power.  When  his  dis- 
ciples were  surprised  at  the  operation,  he  observed  to  them, 
*'  Verily  I  say  unto  you,  if  ye  have  faith,  and  doubt  not,  ye 
shall  not  only  do  this  which  is  done  to  the  ^g  tree,  but  also  if 
ye  shall  say  unto  this  mountain.  Be  thou  removed,  and  be  thou 
cast  into  the  sea,  it  shall  be  done.  And  all  things,  whatsoever 
ye  shall  ask  in  prayer,  believing,  ye  shall  receive." 

p. I  wonder  at  the  disciples  being  struck  with  surprise  at 

so  insignificant  an  act  of  power  as  scorching  up  a  plant,  an 
event  of  daily  occurrence  arising  from  natural  causes,  when 
they  had  seen  their  master  overthrow  all  the  laws  of  nature  in 
turning  water  into  wine,  feeding  multitudes  upon  nothing, 
walkino-  on  the  water,  and  raising  the  dead,  besides  curing 


148 


MIRACLES. 


Speaking 
in  foreign 
tonsoies. 


Curing 
sicknesses. 


blindness,  dumbness,  and  every  manner  of  infirmity  with  a 
word.  I  say  to  myself,  can  he  have  done  these  wonderful 
things,  and  yet  have  created  no  faith  in  his  power  in  the  spec- 
tators ?  or  have  we  another  instance  of  the  inconsistencies  into 
which  a  writer  is  apt  to  fall  when  framing  a  fictitious  narrative  ? 
To  pass,  however,  from  withering  a  plant,  to  moving  a  huge 
mountain  with  a  thought,  is  certainly  a  great  stride.  Did 
Jesus,  or  any  behever  in  him,  at  any  time  do  such  a  thing  ? 

S, — I  cannot  say  I  have  heard  even  of  a  pebble  being  moved 
by  the  power  of  faith. 

P. — There  was  the  knowledge  of  foreign  languages,  to  any 
extent,  conferred  miraculously  on  the  disciples  at  the  feast  of 
Pentecost.  Has  that  power  been  kept  up  ?  I  presume  the 
knowledge,  as  then  imparted,  was  very  perfect  of  its  kind. 

;Sf. — No  ;  the  power  has  not  been  perpetuated.  Christians 
have  to  acquire  languages  by  study,  just  as  others  do  ;  and 
the  Greek  of  the  New  Testament  is  a  ''barbarous  idiom." 
"  The  apostles,"  observes  Jerome,  "  own  themselves  rude  in 
speech,"  referring  to  what  Paul  has  said  of  his  own  diction  in 
2  Cor.  xi.  6.  Origen  makes  a  similar  observation.  And  Eras- 
mus notices  '*  that  the  language  of  the  apostles  is  not  only 
rough  and  unpolished,  but  imperfect ;  also  confused,  and  some- 
times even  plainly  solecising  and  absurd."  ^ 

P. — I  understand  you  to  say  that  the  gift  of  tongues  came 
in  fulfilment  of  the  promise  of  Jesus  to  send  the  Holy  Ghost. 
Has  the  Holy  Ghost  then  been  withdrawn  ? 

S. — No.  He  is  considered  ever  to  be  with  believers,  though 
there  is  now  no  such  sensible  proof  of  his  presence. 

P. — That  is,  we  are  to  believe  in  a  thing  without  the  evi- 
dence attaching  to  the  existence  of  the  thing!  I  must  say  I 
see  declaration,  without  reality,  everywhere  in  these  state- 
ments. 

We  pass  to  a  new  class  of  action,  that  of  removing  infir- 
mities and  sicknesses.  Under  the  old  dispensation,  I  observe 
but  one  such  instance,  namely  the  curing  Naaman  of  his 
leprosy.  How  is  it  that  in  the  new  this  sort  of  manifestation 
was  of  daily  occurrence  ?  Why  should  maladies  be  left  to 
take  their  course  under  one  rule,  and  be  removed  miraculously, 
whenever  met  with,  under  the  other  ? 

I  *'  Hennell's  Inquiry  into  Origin  of  Cliristianity,"  237,  238. 


MIRACLES. 


149 


S. — There  is  a  passage  in  Isaiah  which  probably  led  to  the 
idea  that  the  power  of  miraculous  healing  was  to  be  exercised 
by  the  Messiah,  and  thus  occasioned  the  ascription  of  such 
power  to  Jesus.  It  is  said,  "  Then  the  eyes  of  the  blind  shall 
be  opened,  and  the  ears  of  the  deaf  shall  be  unstopped.  Then 
shall  the  lame  man  leap  as  an  hart,  and  the  tongue  of  the 
dumb  sing  "  (xxxv.  5,  6).  The  time  is  that  of  the  restoration 
of  Israel,  and  the  language  apparently  figurative,  the  blind 
who  were  to  be  made  to  see,  and  the  deaf  who  were  to  be 
made  to  hear,  being  such  spiritually. 

P. — Then  we  have,  probably,  in  these  miracles  of  healing, 
merely  a  fresh  instance  of  the  inventive  faculties  of  the  writers. 
And  what  was  to  be  the  end  of  these  miraculous  cures  ? 
Were  the  persons  delivered  never  to  fall  again  under  the 
power  of  illness,  or  to  die  ?  The  course  of  the  world,  wherein 
infirmities  and  decay  are  the  lot  of  man,  and  inherent  to  the 
composition  of  his  frame  in  the  circumstances  surrounding 
him,  to  my  mind  contradicts  the  whole  action  as  proceeding 
from  divine  interposition. 

I  see  saliva  used  on  several  occasions  as  a  remedial  agent.  Use  of 
What  is  the  meaning  of  this  1 

S. — "  In  the  case  of  magical  cures,  according  to  the  super- 
stition of  the  times,  saliva  was  an  important  ingredient." 
There  is  an  instance  given  by  Tacitus  of  the  Emperor  Vespa- 
tion  employing  his  saliva  to  restore  sight  to  a  blind  man.^ 

p. — It  is  hard  to  associate  such  a  device  with  a  divine 
being,  especially  when  accompanied  with  the  parade  of  put- 
ting the  fingers  into  the  ears,  touching  the  tongue,  looking 
up  to  heaven,  and  sighing.  Perhaps  the  writers  thought  they 
were  giving  reality  to  their  story  by  introducing  such  details. 

Then  there  is  what  is  called  a  deaf  and  dumb   spirit  of  a  ^^^^^ 
formidable  kind,  tearing  the  victim  whose  body  he  iuhabited,  spirit, 
and   making  him  gnash   his  teeth,  foam,   and  wallow  on   the 
ground,  whom  the  disciples  had  tried  to  cast  out  but  could  not. 
Jesus  however  ejects  him,  and  then  explains,   "  This  kind  can 
come  forth  by  nothing  but  by  prayer  and  fasting."     This  looks 
to   me   li^e   mere   pretentiousness.     What   could  have  acted 
on  the  other  occasions  but   the  power   of  God, — a   power   of 
course  invoked  ?  and  how  came  it  that  there  was  one  sort  of 

»  Strauss'  New  Life  of  Jesus,  I.  369  j  II.  155. 


spittle,  &c. 


150 


MIRACLES. 


Devils  in 
erwine. 


Raising  the 
dead. 


evil  spirit  not  amenable  to  such  power,  in  tlie  simplicity  of  its 
fulness,  but  requiring  that  the  operator  should  be  aided,  fur- 
thermore, with  his  own  exercises  of  praying  and  fasting? 

There  is  a  still  more  formidable  possession,  that  of  the 
maniacs  who  haunted  the  tombs,  the  devils  in  whom  were 
sufficiently  numerous  to  occupy  the  bodies  of  two  thousand 
swine,  into  which  they  Avere  ejected.  I  am  at  a  loss  to  under- 
stand'how,  as  a  physical  fact,  such  a  phenomenon  could  possibly 
have  occurred,  or  what  satisfaction  it  could  be  to  the  devils  to 
enter  into  the  swine,  especially  as  the  latter  were  so  soon  to 
destroy  themselves. 

S.—l  am  sorry  I  am  unable  to  assist  you  in  comprehending 
this  story.  All  I  can  say  is  that  it  is  so  told,  except  that  Mark 
and  Luke  deepen  the  difficulty  by  saying  that  this  multitude 
of  evil   spirits  were  all  in  one  man,  not  in  two  as  stated  by 

Matthew. 

p. Perhaps  the  whole  is  put  forward  as  a  mere  \vonder- 

ment,  and  is  due  to  no  other  source  than  the  imagination  of 
the  writer.  The  discrepancy  as  to  whether  there  was  one 
maniac,  or  two,  is  in  itself  enough  to  lead  to  the  reaUty  of  the 
story  being  called  in  question. 

In  the  power  of  raising  the  dead,  I  observe,  Jesus  did  not  stand 
alone,  otherwise  I  should  have  taken  this  attribute  of  creating, 
or  re-creating  life,  as  a  peculiar  demonstration  of  his  divinity. 
Elijah  and  Elisha  exercised  it,  as  did  Peter  and  Paul ;  and 
even  Elisha's  dry  bones  had  this  power  inherent  in  them.  And 
I  observe  that  in  the  mission  conferred  on  the  twelve  apostles 
this  office  of  raising  the  dead  was  comprehended.  Twelve 
men  sent  abroad  to  go  about  restoring  the  dead  to  life  must 
have  caused  intense  commotion  everywhere.  The  reign  of 
death  would,  in  fact,  be  abolished.  What  was  the  result  of 
this  amazing  procedure  ? 

S. None  that  I  can  tell  you  of.      No  results  are  recorded. 

p. Then  I  must  conclude  the  whole  to  have  been  unreal, 

and  that  the  twelve  did  not  go  out  on  such  an  errand.  The 
writer  has  again  exhibited  extravagant  power  out  of  the 
copiousness  of  his  imagination.  And  after  all,  would  it  be  an 
act  of  beneficence  to  comfort  the  survivors  thus  at  the  expense 
of  the  departed  ?  The  dead  have  gone  through  the  painful 
struggle  of  grappling  with  death.      The  soul  has  passed  away 


I 


MIRACLES. 


151 


to  a  hio-her  and  happier  state.      Why  call  it  back   again  to 
re-occupy  the  cast  off,  and  probably  infirm  body,  in  order  to 
undero-o  the  same  painful  process  of  disruption  again  ?     And 
can  it  be  any  comfort  to  the  relatives  that  the  poor  creature 
has  to  die  twice  ?     This  is  not  an  effort  of  power  that  I  can 
ascribe  to  God.     He  would  not  trifle  with  his  creatures  thus, 
calling  away  their  souls  aiKi  then  sending  them  back  again. 
This  sort  of  resurrection  seems  to  me  just  what  the  human 
mind  might  conceive  when  looking  about  for  demonstrations  of 
divine  power  manifested  in  the  miraculous. 

Did   Jesus   rely   on  these  exhibitions   as   evidence   of   his  T^e^app^^ 

divine  mission  1 

g He  did  so.      When  John  sent  to  know  whether  he  was 

the  expected  personage,  meaning  the  Messiah,  he  appealed  to 
the  miracles  he   was    working   in  evidence    of  who  he   was^ 
He  sent  a  similar  message  to  Herod.      "  Go  ye,"  he  said,  "  and 
tell  that  fox,  Behold,  I  cast  out  devils,  and   I  do  cures  to-day 
and  to-morrow."     When   the  Jews  asked   him  to  tell  them 
plainly  if  he  were  the  Christ,  he  replied,   "  I  told  you,  and  ye 
believed  not :  the  works  that  I  do  in  my  Father's  name,  they 
bear  witness  of  me."     And  this   appeal  he  repeatedly  made. 
"  I  have  greater  witness  than  John  ;  for  the  works  winch  the 
Father  hath  given  me  to  finish,  the  same  works  that  I  do 
bear  witness  that  the  Father  hath  sent  me."      "  Many  good 
works  have  I  showed  you  from  my  Father.— If  I  do  not  the 
works  of  my  Father,  believe  me  not.     But  if  I  do,  though  ye 
believe  not  me,  believe  the  works  :  that  ye  may  know,  and 
believe   that  the  Father  is  in  me,  and  I  in  him."      "  The  Father 
that  dwelleth  in  me,  he  doeth  the  works.     Believe  me  that 
I  am  in  the  Father,  and  the  Father  in  me  :  or  else  believe  me 
for  the  very  works  sake."      "  If  I  cast  out  devils  by  the  Spirit 
of  God,  then  the  kingdom  of  God  is  come  unto  you." 

p  _I  see  that  everything  depends  on  the  acceptance  ot  tbis 
testimony  of  the  miracles.  If  they  prevail,  then  the  mission 
of  Jesus,  BS  of  God,  is  established.  If  otherwise,  then  he  was 
not  of  God.  This  appears  to  me  a  very  riskful  issue  to  put  so 
great  a  question  upon.  The  miracles  are  presented  to  us  aB 
•'  the  works  of  God,"  but  in  point  of  fact  they  contradict  all 
we  know  of  as  the  indubitable  works  of  the  Creator  Ihesc 
latter  are  works  in  nature,  regulated  by  a  system  of  refined. 


152 


MIRACLES. 


MIRACLES. 


153 


organized,   and   unchangeable   laws,    the   whole   adjusted    and 
operating  together  in  well-ordered  correspondence  and  sympathy. 
But  the  miracles  are  works  out  of  nature,  dependent  on   no 
restraint  of  law,  and  springing  only  from  arbitrary  individual  will. 
So  that  God  having  given  us  a  testimony  to  himself  in  works  in 
nature,  established  and  maintained  from  the  foundation  of  the 
world  to  the  present  time,  and  spread  abroad  in  the  sight  of 
all  over  the  face  of  the  whole  universe,  we  are  called  upon  to 
accept,  equally  as  testimony  of  him,  facts  of  an  exactly  con- 
verse and  opposite  order,  namely  works  out  of  nature,  said   to 
have  been  presented  at  a  very  short  season,  in  a  circumscribed 
locality,  ages  ago,  to   some   select   and   favoured   persons,  and 
which  are  no  longer  to  be  seen  or  heard   of  anywhere.      The 
facts  in  nature  are  of  a  character  that  none  can  mistake.      A 
child  may  see  that  they  point  to  the  finger  of  God,  and  to  that 
only.      The  facts  out  of  nature,  on  the  other  hand,  are  nowhere 
visible,  and  are  of  a  sort  that  deceivers  appeal  to  liberally  in 
support  of  the  falsest  systems,  and  therefore,  as  such,  they  are 
most  questionable  sources  of  reliance.      One  man  may  say  that 
A  with  his  budget  of  such  facts  is  a  true  emissary  from  God  ; 
another  that  B,  with  his,  is  so.      And  to  us,  at  this  distance  of 
time,  it  is  not  the  facts  themselves  that  are  presented  to  us 
for  acceptance,  but  merely  the  statements  of  certain   persons 
that  there  were   such    facts.       My   faith    in   Jesus  does   not 
depend  on  his  exhibition  to  me  of  what  he  calls  his  Father's 
works,  but  upon  my  believing  those  who  assert  he  did  perform 
such  works.     And  these  it  appears  are  unknown  writers,  living 
in  times  of  ignorance  and  superstition  when  just  such  stories 
as  they  relate  would   obtain  ready  currency.      For  example, 
there  is  the  ejection  of  devils  whose  presence  entailed  infirmi- 
ties, such  as  deafness  or  dumbness,  on  the  parties  possessed. 
Now  we  see  no  such   possessions,  and   are   satisfied  that  such 
disabilities  proceed  from  physical  causes ;   and  yet  Jesus  stakes 
the  integrity  of  his  mission  on  our  believing  the  declarations 
of  people  of  other  days  that  there  were  such  devils,  and  that 
he  cast  them  out.      And  if  we  stand  in  such  a  predicament  as 
to   our  faith,  what   may  be  the   position   of  those  who   have 
never  had  even  that  measure  of  testimony  which  is  presented 
to  us  ? 


S.—The  circumstances  of  those  altogether  without  the  testi-  Thoso^th- 
mony  have  not  been  overlooked.     The  two  classes,  those  with    dence^of 
and  those  without  the  testimony,  are  relatively  spoken  of,  and 
both  come  under  judgment.     Jesus  upbraids  "the  cities  where- 
in most  of  his  mighty  works  were  done,"  saying    '  Woe  unto 
thee  Chorazin  !  Woe  unto  thee,  Bethsaida !  for  if  the  mighty 
works,  which  were  done  in  you,  had  been  done  in  Tyre  and 
Sidon,  they  would  have  repented  long  ago  in  sackcloth  and 
asbes.-If  the  mighty  works,  which  have  been  done  in  thee, 
had  been  done  in  Sodom,  it  would  have  remained  until  this 
day  "     "  K  I  had  not  done  among  them  the  works  which  none 
other  man  did,  they  had  not  had  sin  :  but  now  have  they  both 
seen  and  hated  both  me  and  my  Father." 

P  —AH    this   appears   to   me    most    extraordinary.       The  inequaWy 
question  before  us   is   equitable   treatment  by  a  divme   and  timony. 
impartial  judge,    and   we    are    presented   with    dispensations 
marked  with   partiality.     There  is   certain  testimony  offered 
for  acceptance,  on  which  important  results  depend.      There  is 
a  universal  testimony  to  the  Creator  in  his  works  in  nature 
but  that  is  to  avail  no  one  anything.     The  testimony  on  which 
salvation  altogether  turns  is  as  to  certain  works  out  of  nature 
and  those  to  be  judged  of  relatively  to  it  are  circumstanced 
very  differently.    There  are  persons  on  whom  the  miracles  take 
effect  personally.    These  have  the  strongest  testimony,  as  when 
a  man  blind  from  birth  has  sight  conferred  upon  him  or  when 
Lazarus,  knowing  himself  to  have  died,  finds  himself  walking 
out  of  his  sepulchre  alive  again.     There  are  those  who  more 
or  less  perfectly  and  intelligently,  witness  one  or  more  of  these 
marvellous  occurrences.     There  arc  the  people  of  the  times  of 
the  miracles,  who,  though   they   may  not  have  been  actual 
spectators  themselves,  hear  of  these  marvels  from  persons  on 
whom  they  may  more  or  less  rely,  who  are  located  more  or 
less  near  the  scenes  of  the  events,  and  who  witnessed  them 
themselves,   or  know  those  who  may   have   -t--^^  t;;-"- 
Then  there  are  those  who  must  depend  for  the  fact  of  these 
occurrences  on  the  written  statements  of  others,  some  near 
enough  the  times  in  question  to  have  a  fair  means  of  judging    ■ 
who  the  writers  were,  and  what  degree  of  credit  may  be  due 
to  them,  and  others  who  may  be  in  times  too  remote  to  allow 
of  their  having  any  knowledge  of  these  writers,  even  as  to  who 


154 


MIRACLES. 


Publication 
of  the  tes- 
timony. 


they  may  have  been,  in  which  category  we  of  this  day  stand. 
Besides  these  there  are  those  to  whom  the  special  testimony, 
or  means  of  salvation,  never  has  been,  or  could  be,  presented  in 
any  shape.      What  more  partial  than  the  results,  as  declared, 
it  would  seem,  by  Jesus  himself  ?     He,  in  his  divine  prescience, 
hesitates  not  to  assure  us  that  had  Tyre  and  Sid  on  witnessed 
the  works  wrought  in  Chorazin  and  Bethsaida,  they  would  have 
repented  and  not  come  under  judgment,  and  had  Sodom  done 
so,  it  would  have  remained  to  this  day.      And  it  is  seemingly 
declared,  furthermore,  that  if  the  works  had  not  been  displayed, 
there  would  have  been  no  imputation  of  sin,  and  yet  those  are 
made  to  suffer  as  sinners  from  whom  all  knowledge  of  these 
works  is  withheld.      I  ask,  can  a  measure,  such  as  this  system 
of  probation  on  special  testimony,  so  full  of  inherent  and  una- 
voidable defect,  be  really  from  God  ? 

Putting  aside,  however,  all  other  difficulties,  the  publication 
of  this  testimony  was,  I  presume,  made  as  thoroughly  as  possible 
while  the  marvels  were  being  performed. 

S. The  conduct  of  Jesus,  in  spreading  abroad   the  know- 
ledge   of   his    miracles,    and    therewith    making    known    the 
nature  of  his  own  mission,  appears  to  have  varied  exceedingly. 
He  said  to  the  maniac  out  of  whom  he  had  cast  a  legion  of 
devils  into  the  swine,  ''  Go  home  to  thy  friends,  and  tell  them 
how  great  things  the  Lord  hath  done  for  thee"  (Mark  v.  19). 
On  giving  sight  to  one  bom  blind,  he  announced  the  object  of 
the  act  to  be,  ''  that  the  works  of  God  should  be  manifest  in 
him"  (John  ix.  3).      And  when  about  to  raise  Lazarus  from 
the  dead,  he  offered  up  special  prayer  to  God,  saying  that  he 
made  his  request,  not  on  his  own  account,  as  he  was  aware 
that  God   always   heard   him,   but    "because    of   the    people 
which  stand  by,  I  said  it,  that  they  may  believe  that  thou 
hast  sent  me"  (John  xi.  42).      On  other  occasions  he  took  a 
very  different  course.      After  healing  a  leper,  he  said,   ''  See 
thou  tell  no  man"   (Matt.  viii.  4);    "but  he  went   out,   and 
began  to  publish  it  much,  and  to  blaze  abroad  the  matter" 
(Mark  i.  45).      After   giving   sight    to    two  blind    men,    he 
"straitly  charged  them,   saying,   see   that   no   man  know  it. 
But  they,  when  they  were  departed,  spread  abroad  his  fame 
in  all  that  country"   (Matt.  ix.  30,  31).      "Great  multitudes 
followed  him,  and  he  healed  them  all ;  and  charged  them  that 


\C' 


MIRACLES. 


155 


they  should  not  make  him  known'  (Matt  xh.  l^^^^^JJ^ 
about  to  restore  the  ruler's  daughter  to  hfe,  he  f^ff^jf  ° J 
man  to  follow  him,  save  Peter,  and  James,  and  John  and 
man  to  ioiiu«  ,  _         charged  them  straitly 

when  he  had  brought  her  to  life      he  '^'f  ^^  . 

that  no  man  should  know  it.'  (Mark  -  '^'  *'^.  ^e  eWed 
a  man  deaf  and  with  an  impediment  m  b'^  ^P««'=^;  ^  ^ZC 
them  that  they  should  tell  no  man  ;  but  the  m<"^\he  charged 
ihem  o  mu Jh  the  tnore  a  great  deal  they  published  it 
Sk  vii  ^6).  On  bestowing  sight  an  a  Wind  man  he  en- 
(Markvn.^oj  .^^^  ^^e  town,  nor  tell  it  to 

Cln  the  torn"  fntrk  vHi.   26).       Peter    had  recognised 
Zi  I  'h     Christ  the  Son  of  the  hving  God.     And  Jesus 
a'wered   and  said  unto  him.  Blessed  -^/^-^^^X  bTt 
iona  •  for  flesh  and  blood  hath  not  revealed  it  unto  thee,  but 
Ty   Fair  which   is  in    heaven/'     After  this  he   conferr  d 
unon  him  "  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,    and     then 
charts  he  his  disciples  that  they  should  tell  no  man  that 
he  was  Jesus  the  Chrlt"(Matt.  xvi.  16-20).     He  wen^  ^'pon 
a  high  mountain,  taking  Peter  Jame.  and^  'tjZ^^, 
There  he  was  "  transfigured,        and,   beliow,  i_  1 1 

unto  them  Moses  and  Elias  talking  with  him.  When  this 
ararition  was  over.  "  Jesus  charged  them,  saying.  Tell  the 
vSon  o  no  man  u^til  the  Son  of  man  be  risen  again  from 
he  dead  "Matt.  -ii.  1-9)  On  meeting  with  persons  pos- 
sessed with  devils,  he  "  suffered  not  the  devils  to  speak,  be 
cause  tC  knew  him  "  (Mark  i.  34).  "  And  unclean  spirits, 
when  tly  saw  him,  fell  down  before  him,  and  cried  saying 
S:;  art  [he  Son  of  God.  And  he  straitly  charged  them  that 
they  should  not  make  him  known    (M-k  ^  1   .  l^  ^^^  ^_^^^ 

P._You   -F-  -    -t;ks   and  li  divine  character  SfS 
Jesus  wishing  to   keep  nis  worub  „,,rT,ose  of  his  """y- 

thus  private  ?     To  do  so  was  to  nullify  the  purpose 

"T-oliTf  Occasions  reasons  are  recorded.  In  respect  of 
the^etit  is  said  that  on  his  disobeying  J-  ;--?  '^ 
and  plishing  the  miracle  wrought  -  ^^^^ -^''tn  dTert  . 
;Lr (rk\:  ^ntwtnt'^^^^^^^^  the  "great  mult. 
£::-  f.e  had  healid.  not  to  make  ^^^^^^^  ^^ 
was  to  fulfil  a  prophecy  by  Isaiah,  to  the  etlect  laax 


MIRACLES. 


157 


156 


MIRACLES. 


not  to  "  strive,  nor  cry ;  neither  shall  any  man  hear  his  voice 
in  the  streets"  (Matt.  xii.  17-21). 

p. — The  first  appears  to  me  to  be  an  unsatisfactory  reason 
for  conduct  so  inconsistent  with  his  mission.     Surely  it  was  an 
unworthy  thought  to  suppress  the  very  evidence  he  was  com- 
missioned to  spread  abroad  out  of  mere  personal  apprehension 
of  the   consequences  to  himself  of  being  identified  with   his 
mission.      As  regards  the  second  reason,  I  am  unable  to  per- 
ceive the  applicability  of  the  prophecy  said   to  have  been  so 
fulfilled.      What  connection  is  there  between  its  being  known 
that   he   worked   miracles,   and   his    striving  and   crying,  and 
so  creating  a  disturbance  in  the  streets  ?     And  if  the  sup- 
pression of  the  evidence  to  his  mission  was  necessary  to  fulfil 
this  prophecy,  then  the  fulfilment  was  violated  by  his  taking 
steps  to  publish  this  evidence,  as  when  he  told  the  restored 
maniac  to  tell  his  friends  ''  how  great  things  "  had  been  done 
for    him,   and  also  upon  other    numerous  occasions  when  he 
appealed  to  these  his  works  openly.      Nor  can  I  understand 
what  was  really  expected  when  these  injunctions  to  suppress 
the  evidence  of  the  miracles  were  given.      Were  the  parties  to 
falsify  the  facts,  and  to  say  they  had  got  cured  in  some  ordi- 
nary manner  ?     Could  people  whose  sight  had  been  suddenly 
restored  be  expected  to  go  about  saying  nothing,  as  if  nothing 
had  happened?     And  was  it   likely  that  when  large  bodies 
were   dealt  with  together,  the  ''  great  multitudes "  that  were 
healed,  the  reserve  enjoined  could  possibly  be  secured  1     The 
order  was  an  irrational  one,   and  was,  it  appears,   constantly 
unheeded.      Is  this  sort  of  weak  demonstration  characteristic 
of  a  divine  personage  ?     Then  again,  when  he  had  to  offer 
himself  to  the  world  as  the  Christ,  what  could  be  gained  by 
conceal  inof  from  the  world  that  such  was  his  real  character  ? 
Were  his  disciples,  after  knowing  who  he  actually  was,  to  falsify 
the  fact,  and  describe  him  in  some  other  character?    I  observe 
too  that  Peter's  recognition  of  him  is  ascribed  to  a  special 
revelation  made  to  him  from  above,  and  is  said   to  be  a  token 
of  blessing.      From  what  quarter  did  the  devils,  who  all  knew 
him,  get  their  intelligence  ?     And  could  it  in  their  instances 
have  been  associated  with  what  was  blessed  ?     I  cannot  account 
for  so  much  contradiction  and  confusion  but  by  supposing  that 
the  writers  are  dealing  with  unreal  facts. 


I 


How  after  all,  did  the  testimony  of  the  miracles  work  ? 
S_At  the  time  of  performiiig  the  miracles,  the  power  wa«  Recept,c» 
generally  considered  to  be  of  God,  and  to  stamp  Jesus  there-  timony. 
fore  a.  one  coming  from  God.      "No  man,"  said  Nicodemus 
"  can  do  these  miracles  that  thou  doest,  except  God  be  with 
him"  (John  iii.  2).      "  Many  of  the  people  believed  on  him, 
and  said   When  Christ  cometh,  will  he  do  more  miracles  than 
these  which  this  man  hath  done  1"  (John  vii.  31).     The  man 
blind  from  birth,  to  whom  he  gave  sight,  m  disputing  with 
the  unbelieving  Jews,  said,  "  Since  the  world  began,  wa^  it  not 
heard  that  any  man  opened  the  eyes  of  one  that  was  born 
blind      If  this  man  were  not  of  God,  he  could  do  nothing 
(John  ix  32  33).     He  therefore  was  proclaimed  to  the  people 
by  Peter  to  be  "  a  man  approved  of  God  among  you  by  miracles 
and  wonders  and  signs,  which  God  did  by  him  in  the  midst  of 
you  as  ye  yourselves  also  know"  (Acts  ii.  22).      "Many,    we 
are  told   "  believed  in  his  name,  when  they  saw  the  miracles 
which  he  did"  (John  ii.  23  ;  see  also  John  vi  14  ;  x.  41   4-  ; 
xi.  45),  so  that  even  those  who  were  opposed  to  h.m  testified 
that  "  the  world"  had  "  gone  after  him"  (John  xii.  19).     But 
substantially,  and  effectively,  he  was  not  credited.    "He  came 
unto  his  own,  and  his  own  received  him  not     (John  i.  11). 
"  What  he  hath  seen  and  heard,  that  he  testifieth  ;    and  no 
man  receiveth  his  testimony"  (John  iii.  32).     And  it  would 
appear  that  the  requisitions  of  prophecy  involved  his  being 
thus  rejected.     "  But  though  he  had  done  so  many  miracles 
before  them,  yet  they  believed  not  on  him :  that  the  saying  of 
Esaias  the  p/ophet  might  be  fulfilled,  which  he  spake.  Lord 
who  hath  believed  our  report  1  and  to  whom  hath  the  arm  of 
the  Lord  been  revealed  1     Therefore  they  could  not  believe 
because  Esaias  said   again.  He  hath  blinded  their  eyes,  and 
hardened   their  heart ;    that  they  should  not  see  with  their 
eyes  nor  understand  with  their  heart,  and  be  converted,  and  I 
should  heal  them.     These  things  said  Esaias,  when  he  saw  his 

glory,  and  spake  of  him"  (John  xii.  37-41). 

^   S  times  Jesus  positively  refused  to  put  his  mission  to  proof  by  Wh^d- 

exhibition  of  the  miraculous  power  considered  to  be  associated  ^,,y. 
therewith,  even  attributing  sin  to  those  who  looked  for  such  a 
test     To  the  Pharisees,  when  making  such  a  demand  upon  him. 
he  said  "An  evil  and  adulterous  generation  secketh  after  a  sign; 


158 


MIRACLES. 


s 


and  there  shall  no  sign  be  given  to  it,  but  the  sign  of  the  prophet 
Jooas  :    for  as  Jonas  was  three  days  and  three  nights  in  the 
whale's  belly  ;  so  shall  the  Son  of  man  be  three  days  and  three 
nights  in  the  heart  of  the  earth"  (Matt.  xii.  38-40)  ;  resorting 
to^he  same  evasion,  with  the  same  reference  to  the  miracle  of 
Jonah    when    on   another   occasion    Pharisees   and   Sadducees 
together   asked   for  a  sign   (Matt.   xvi.   4).      Mark,   however, 
(viii.  11)  has  it  that  the  answer  given  was,  ''There  shall  no 
sign  be  given  unto  this  generation,"  as  if  the  appeal  to  the 
miraculous  never  had  been,  or  would  be,  made  in  those  days. 
The  instances  in  John  are  of  a  similar  character.      Jesus  had 
been  flogging  the  money-changers  and  others  who  were  dese- 
crating the  temple,  and  driving  them  out,  on  which  the  Jews 
askedliim  for  some  sign  to  prove  his  right  so  to  interfere.     On 
this  he  said,  "  Destroy  this  temple,  and  in  three  days  I  will 
raise  it  up,"  which  is  stated  to  have  referred  to  "  the  temple 
of  his  body,"  though  that  certainly,  according  to  the  accounts 
given,  cannot  be  said  to  have  ever  been  "  destroyed."     Again, 
when'  they  asked  him,  ''  What  sign  shewest  thou,  then,  that 
we  may  see,  and  believe  thee  ?  what  dost  thou  work  V  refer- 
ring him  for  an  example  to  the  feeding  of  the  Israelites  with 
manna  in  the  time  of  Moses,  his  answer  was  that  his  Father 
could  give  them  "  the  true  bread  from  heaven,"  meaning  his 
doctrine  (John  ii.  18-21 ;   vL  30-35).     It  was,  in  fact,  viewed 
as  a  reproach  to  the  Jews  that  they  should  ''require  a  sign" 
(1  Cor.  i,  22).      In  a  parable  Jesus  distinctly  sets  at  nought 
the  power  of  miraculous  agency  to  convert  the  heart  to  God. 
He   describes  two  parties,  one  in  heaven,  and  the  other  in 
hell.      The  one  in  hell  has  a  feeling  for  five  brothers  he  has 
left  behind  him  on  earth,  and  wishes  that  the  one  who  is  in 
heaven  should  be  sent  "  that  he  may  testify  unto  tliem,  lest 
they  also  come  into  this  place  of  torment."     The  response  is, 
"  They  have  Moses  and  the  prophets  ;   let  them  hear  them." 
"  Nay,"  says  the  unhappy  interceder,  "  but  if  one  went  unto 
them  from  the  dead,  they  will  repent."     To  which  the  conclu- 
sive reply  is  given,  "  If  they  hear  not  Moses  and  the  prophets, 
neither  will  they  be  persuaded  though  one  rose  from  the  dead" 
(Luke  xvi.  27-31).      And  in  the  instance  of  Jesus  himself,  he 
was  arrested   and   put  to  death  as  a  criminal,  the  populace 
loudly  calling  for  his  death,  and  his  divine  works  availing  him 
nothing. 


MIRACLES. 


159 


P  —I  find  it  impossible  to  come  to  any  right  understand- 
ino-  of  this  test  of  the  miracles.      At  one  time  it  is  held  out 
by'' Jesus  as  all  that  he  relied  upon  for  proof  of  his  mission  ; 
at  another  he  thoroughly  discourages  such  an  idea,  and  re- 
fuses to  make  any  such  demonstration.      And  the  end  of  all, 
so  far  as  results  go,  is  absolute  failure.      And  if,  notwithstand- 
incr   the  conflict  of  statement,   the  sign    of  the  miracles  was 
offered   and  relied   upon,   seeing   that   the   exhibition  had  no 
weight  with    those  in  whose  sight  the   miracles  were  enacted, 
how  is  it  to  be  supposed  that  we  are  to  be  impressed  by  them, 
at  this  distant  date,  through  mere  hearsay  1 

I  see  it  said  that  the  rejection  of  this  potent  testimony 
was  in  fulfilment  of  prophecy,  there  having  been  here  as  in 
the  case  of  Pharaoh,  the  extraordinary  exhibition  of  God  hold- 
incr  out  miracles  in  one  hand,  and  then  shutting  up  people  s 
ev'^es  lest  they  should  see  and  apprehend  them,  with  the  other. 
I  cannot  ascribe  such  double  deahng  to  God.  The  hardening 
of  the  heart  by  him  seems  to  me,  on  each  occasion,  a  weak 
invention,  thrown  in  to  account  for  the  non-reeeption  of  these 

miraculous  doings.  i,     ij    t^  -n 

But    there    is    one    source   of   evidence   which    should    be  Power  to 
conclusive.      You   have  said  that  the  followers  of  Jesus  were  ^^ades  to 
to  exhibit  the  same,  or  even  greater  p^>wer  m   miracles,  than  ^^^^pt^nce 

,  of  faith. 

he  had  displayed.  ,    ,       ,       „  rn.         •       » 

S—Yes  it  has  certainly  been  st»  declared.         These  signs, 
it  is   stated,  "shall  follow  them  that  believe;  In   my  name 
shall  they  cast  out  devils;  they  shall  speak  with -new  tongues  ; 
they  shall  take   up   serpents ;  and   if  they  drink  any  deadly 
thincT  it  shall  not  h.irt   them ;  they  shall   lay  hands  on  the 
sick°'and  they  shall  recover  "  (Mark  xvi.  17,  18).      "Verily, 
verily  I  say  unto  you,"  Jesus  declared,  "  He  that  believeth  on 
me  the  works  that  I  do  shall  he  do  also ;  and  greater  works 
than  these  shall  he  do ;  because  I  go  unto  my  Father      And 
whatsoever  ye  shall  ask  in  my  name,  that  will  I  do.  that  the 
Father  may  be  glorified  in  the  Son.     If  ye  shall  ask  anything 
in  my  name,  I  will  do  it"  (John  xiv.   12-14).      The  demon- 
stration of  miraculous  power  was  the  appointed    means    by 
which  th^  doctrinal  teaching  was  commended  to   those  ad- 
dressed     The  chiefs  of  the  Jewish  persuasion,  on  hearing  ot 
Peter's  cure  wrought  on  a  man  who  had  been  a  cripple  from 


MIRACLES. 


161 


160 


MIRACLES. 


birth,  tried  to  put  down  the  movement  by  coercion.      On  this 
the  believers,  "  with  one  accord."  lifted  up  their  cry  to  God, 
saying,  ''  And  now.  Lord,  behold  their  threatening^ :  and  grant 
unto  thy  servants,  that  with   all  boldness  they  may  speak  thy 
word,  by  stretching  forth  thine  hand  to  heal :  and  that  signs 
and  wonders  may  be  done  by  the  name  of  thy  holy  child  Jesus;" 
upon  which,  "the  place  was  shaken  where  they  were  assembled 
together,"  and  the  Holy  Ghost  acted  on  them  in  power  (Acts 
iv?  29-31).      "And  by  the  hands  of  the  apostles  were  many 
signs  and  wonders  wrought  among  the  people.— And  believers 
were  the  more  added  to  the  Lord,  multitudes  both  of  men  and 
women  "  (Acts  v.  1 2,  14).     "  The  people  with  one  accord  gave 
heed  unto  those  things  which  Philip  spake,  hearing  and  seeing 
the  miracles  which  he  did"  (Acts  viii.  6).     Paul  and  Barnabas 
also  spoke  "boldly  in  the  Lord,   which  gave  testimony  unto 
the  word  of  his  grace,  and  granted  signs  and  wonders  to  be 
done  by  their  hands  "  (Acts  xiv.  3).      Paul  said  of  his  own 
career,  "  I  will  not  dare  to  speak  of  any  of  those  things  which 
Christ  hath  not  wrought  by  me,  to  make  the  Gentiles  obedient, 
by  word  and  deed,  through  mighty  signs  and  wonders,  by  the 
power  of  the  Spirit  of  God ;  so  that  from  Jerusalem,  and  round 
about  Illyricum,  I  have  fully  preached  the  gospel  of  Christ " 
(Rom.  XV.  18,  19).     After  this  manner  the  preachers  of  those 
days  "  went  forth,  and  preached  everywhere,  the  Lord  work- 
ing with  them,  and  confirming  the  word  with  signs  following  " 
(Mark  xvi.  20).     "How,"  says  Paul,  throwing  himself  into  the 
position  of  those  addressed,  "  shall  we  escape,  if  we  neglect 
so  great  salvation  ;  which  at  the  first  began  to  be  spoken  by 
the  Lord,  and  was  confirmed  unto  us  by  them  that  heard  him; 
God  also'  bearing  them  witness,  both  with  signs  and  wonders, 
and  with  divers  miracles,  and  gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  accord- 
ing to  his  own  will"  (Heb.   ii.  3,  4).      Nor  was  the  enforce- 
ment  of  doctrine   by  the  means  of  miraculous  attestation  a 
mere  passing  demonstration.      The  possession  and  exercise  of 
the  power  entered  into  the  very  constitution  and  organization 
of  the  church,  as  operating  in  the  character  of  God's  witness- 
on  earth  in  all  ages.      "  There  are  diversities  of  gifts,  but  the 
same  Spirit.    And  there  are  differences  of  administrations,  but 
the  same  Lord.     And  there  are  diversities  of  operations,  but 
it  is  the  same  God  which  worketh  all  in  all.      But  the  mani- 


festation of  the  Spirit  is  given  to  every  man  to  profit  withal. 
For  to  one  is  given  the  Spirit  of  wisdom  ;  to  another  the  word 
of  knowledge  by  the  same  Spirit;  to  another  faith  by  the  same 
Spirit ;  to  another  the  gifts  of  healing  by  the  same  Spirit  ;  to 
another  the  working  of  miracles;  to  another  prophecy;  to 
another  discerning  of  spirits;  to  another  divers  kinds  of  tongues ;" 
and  the  position  is  enforced  by  the  illustration  of  the  human 
body,  composed  of  various  parts,  each  with  its  appropriate  office, 
but  all  working  together  for  the  good  of  all,  as  one  harmonious 
whole.  And  so  God,  it  is  added,  "has  set  some  in  the  church, 
first  apostles,  secondarily  prophets,  thirdly  teachers,  after  that 
miracles,  then  gifts  of  healings,  helps,  governments,  diversities 
of  tongues"  (1  Cor.  xii.  4-28). 

p. Here,  then,  we  have  something  tangible  which  should 

be  present  in  the  existing  day.  There  is  the  doctrine,  as 
necessary  now  to  the  salvation  of  mankind  as  ever.  Where  are 
the  miracles  which  were  to  accompany  and  confirm  it,  remain- 
ing as  "  signs  "  that  were  to  "  follow  them  that  believe  ?" 

S, There  have  been  none  since  the  days  of  the  apostles  The  signs 

but  what  are  recognised  as  the  mere  results  of  trickery,  im-  ^^^  ^^nt- 
position,   or  misrepresentations.      They  are  comprehended  in  ^s- 
monkish  legends,  to  which  none   but  the  most  ignorant  give 

credit. 

p. The  case,  then,  seems  complete.     The  recorders  of  the 

miracles  staked  their  veracity  on  the  assertion  that  miracles  not 
only  had  been,  but  should  be,  explaining  aLo  how  these 
miraculous  demonstrations  entered  into  the  whole  body  of  the 
system.  When,  therefore,  we  see  that  the  miracles  which 
should  be,  are  not,  and  that  the  evidence  for  the  present  day 
exists  not,  how  are  we  to  stretch  our  minds,  against  all  pro- 
babilities and  experience,  to  believe  all  that  these  same  persons 
say  of  the  days  that  are  not  ? 


PROPHECY. 


163 


The  appeal 
to  pro- 
phecy. 


PEOPHECY. 


V. 

RENEWED  CONVERSATION. 

Pundit. — We  have  still  to  consider  the  miracles  connected 
with  the  birth,  death,  and  resurrection  of  Jesus. 

Student. — The  history  of  Jesus  is  so  mixed  up  with  ques- 
tions of  prophecy,  as  well  as  of  miracle,  that  perhaps  it  would 
be  well  to  reserve  entering  thereon  directly  till  we  have  first 
dealt  with  the  subject  of  prophecy,  so  far  as  to  see  whether 
any  testimony  to  the  divine  authorship  of  the  Bible  can  be 
claimed  from  that  source. 

P. — Very  well.  Be  pleased  to  explain  to  me  what  sort  of 
reliance  is  placed  upon  prophetic  utterances  as  proving  the 
action  of  God. 

S. — The  power  to  discern  and  declare  future  events  is  as 
much  beyond  the  capacity  of  mere  men  as  that  of  working 
miracles.  It  has  consequently  been  openly  appealed  to  as 
affording  a  test  whereby  to  distinguish  the  true  from  false 
gods.  "  Produce  your  cause,  saith  the  Lord;  bring  forth  your 
strong  reasons,  saith  the  king  of  Jacob.  Let  them  bring 
them  forth,  and  show  us  what  shall  happen  :  let  them  show 
the  former  things,  what  they  be,  that  we  may  consider  them, 
and  know  the  latter  end  of  them  ;  or  declare  us  thin<rs  for  to 
come.  Show  the  things  that  are  to  come  hereafter,  that  we^ 
may  know  that  ye  are  gods"  (Isa.  xli.  21-23).  ''Search  the 
scriptures,"  said  Jesus,  "  for  in  them  ye  think  ye  have  eternal 
life  ;  and  they  are  they  which  testify  of  me"  (John  v.  39) ; 
and  in  the  accounts  of  his  life  the  appeal  to  the  events  thereof, 
as  being  in  fulfilment  of  prophecies,  is  constantly  made.  And 
this  description  of  testimony  is  held  up  as  more  striking,  and 
convincing,  than  even  the  plainest  ocular  demonstrations. 
''  They  have  Moses  and   the  prophets,"  Jesus  said,  "  let  them 


, 


hear  them.  If  they  hear  not  Moses  and  the  prophets,  neither 
will  they  be  persuaded,  though  one  rose  from  the  dead  "  (Luke 
xvi.  29-31).  Peter  and  two  other  disciples  bad  been  vouch- 
safed a  special  manifestation  of  Jesus  in  a  glorified  state, 
attended  by  Moses  and  Elias.  Peter  adverts  to  this  when  he 
says,  "  We  have  not  followed  cunningly  devised  fables,  when 
we  made  known  unto  you  the  power  and  coming  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  but  were  eye-witnesses  of  his  majesty."  But  he 
presents  prophecy  as  a  superior  source  of  satisfaction,  adding, 
"  We  have  also  a  more  sure  word  of  prophecy ;  whereunto  ye 
do  well  that  ye  take  heed,  as  unto  a  light  that  shineth  in  a 
dark  place,  until  the  day  dawn,  and  the  day-star  arise  in  your 
hearts.  For  the  prophecy  came  not  in  old  time  by  the  will  of 
man  :  but  holy  men  of  God  spake  as  they  were  moved  by  the 
Holy  Ghost"  (2  Pet.  i.  lG-21). 

P. — Of  course,  as  in  the  case  of  working  miracles,  there  False  pro 
has   been  a  liability  to   deceivers   coming  forward  with  pre-  ^  ^ 
tended  prophecies  ? 

S. — There  has  been  abundant  opening  for  such  deception 
in  the  remote  times  of  the  Bible,  when  manifestations  of  the 
sort  were  habitually  looked  for  and  trusted  in.  "  Then 
the  Lord  said  unto  me,"  declares  Jeremiah,  "the  prophets 
prophesy  lies  in  my  name  :  I  sent  them  not,  neither  have  I 
commanded  them,  neither  spake  unto  them  :  they  prophesy 
unto  you  a  false  vision  and  divination,  and  a  thing  of  nought, 
and  the  deceit  of  their  heart"  (Jer.  xiv.  14).  "I  have  not 
sent  these  prophets,  yet  they  ran :  I  have  not  spoken  to  them, 
yet  they  prophesied."  "I  have  not  sent  them,  saith  the 
Lord,  yet  they  prophesy  a  lie  in  my  name"  (Jer.  xxiii.  21  ; 
xxvii.  15). 

P. — How  w^ere  the  people  to  distinguish  between  a  true  Test  of 
and  a  false  prophet  ?  pheuJ"" 

S. — The  rule  is  thus  laid  down.  "  The  prophet,  which 
shall  presume  to  speak  a  word  in  my  name,  which  I  have  not 
commanded  him  to  speak,  or  that  shall  speak  in  the  name  of 
other  gods,  even  that  prophet  shall  die.  And  if  thou  say  in 
thine  heart.  How  shall  we  know  the  word  which  the  Lord 
hath  not  spoken  ?  When  a  prophet  speaketh  in  the  name  of 
the  Lord,  if  the  thing  follow  not,  nor  come  to  pass,  that  is  the 
thing  which  the  Lord  hath  not  spoken,  but  the  prophet  hath 


164 


PROPHECY. 


' 


PROPHECY. 


165 


spoken  it  presumptuously:  thou  shalt  not  be  afraid  of  him" 
(Deut.  xviii.  20-22). 

P. — This  rule  contemplates  only  utterances  such  as  were  to 
be  fulfilled  promptly,  within  the  life-time  of  the  prophet 
giving  them  forth.  Were  there  none  which  related  to  events 
of  remote  accomplishment  ? 

S. — There  is  room  to  infer  that  the  prophets  treated  com- 
monly of  what  they  conceived  would  shortly  be  brought  to  pass, 
but  results  have  shown  that,  if  their  statements  are  to  stand, 
they  must  be  referred,  in  most  instances,  to  a  distant  future. 
That  this  was  not  contemplated  when  the  test  to  be  applied  to 
prophecy  was  laid  down,  is  apparent. 

P. — If  the  event  is  to  govern  the  acceptance  of  the  pro- 
phecy, then,  until  the  event  occurs,  however  distant  the  day, 
no  one  can  say  whether  the  prophecy  is  to  be  depended  on,  and 
heeded,  or  not.  Under  such  circumstances,  I  cannot  conceive 
what  can  be  the  utility  of  prophecy.  The  event,  which  con- 
trols all,  would  in  due  time  declare  itself  and  prevail,  whether 
the  prophecy  were  uttered  or  not. 

S. — So  it  might  be  thought.  Still,  as  you  will  observe,  we 
are  enjoined  to  ''take  heed"  unto  prophecy,  "  as  unto  a  light 
that  shineth  in  a  dark  place." 

P. — This  exhortation  certainly  does  not  consist  with  the 
rule  making  the  integrity  of  a  prophecy  to  depend  upon  its 
realization.  However,  I  presume  that  this  light  which  is  to 
illuminate  us  in  our  natural  darkness,  at  all  events  shines  so 
clearly  as  to  indicate,  without  room  for  mistake,  the  objects  on 
which  it  casts  its  radiance. 
Indistinct-  ^^ — ^^  ^^^^  Contrary,  nothing  is  more  difficult  than  the 
nessof  pro-  application  of  prophecy  to  the  events  foretold.  In  the  first 
^  ^^^'  place,  there  are  serious  differences  as  to  whether  prophecies 
have  been,  or  remain  to  be,  accomplished.  The  Jews,  for 
example,  deny  the  fulfilment  of  those  predictions  of  the 
Messiah  which  the  Christians  beheve  to  have  been  brought  to 
pass  in  the  person  and  career  of  Jesus.  And  over  the  whole 
range  of  the  Apocalj^pse,  and  the  analogous  prophecies  in 
Daniel,  the  Christians  are  at  great  issue  among  themselves  in 
deciding  whether  fulfilments  have  taken  place  or  not.  In  re- 
spect of  these  prophecies,  whether  those  cited  in  the  histories 
of  Jesus,  or  those  in  the  Apocalypse,  it  is  only  by  considerable 


straining  of  the  language,  and  accommodation,  that  seeming 
fulfilments  are  made  out ;  and  in  regard  to  the  adaptation  of 
events  to  the  Apocalypse,  the  differences,  in  selecting  the 
events  and  making  the  applications  thereto,  are  nearly  as 
numerous  as  the  interpreters. 

P. — What  is  this  owing  to  ?     Surely  the  language  of  the  "^^^F"^' 
prophet  should  be  sufficiently  clear  to  make  it  apparent  at  style. 
once  whether  any  given  event  is,  or  is  not,  what  he  pointed  to. 

S. — One  would  have  thought  so,  especially  in  view  of  the 
test  by  which  the  prophecy  was  to  be  judged  of  Besides  the 
difficulties  inherent  to  the  comprehension  of  extinct  languages, 
the  phraseology  of  the  prophecies  is  more  than  ordinarily  in- 
volved. The  prophets  appear  to  have  considered  themselves 
privileged  to  deal  in  obscurities.  "  The  words  of  the  wise," 
it  was  thought,  were  presented  with  most  effect  in  "  dark 
sayings "  (Prov.  i.  6).  The  prophets  are  apt  to  pass  from 
subject  to  subject  without  connection,  mixing  things  present 
with  those  that  are  to  come,  using  figurative  designations,  or 
actual  symbols,  changing  persons  and  tenses  in  an  unrestrained 
manner,  and  but  dimly  shadowing  forth  the  objects  indicated. 
With  such  a  foundation  to  work  upon,  and  where  unchal- 
lengeable precision  is  not  to  be  expected,  the  ingenuity  of 
interpreters  has  enabled  them  to  adapt  the  prophecies  to  any 
facts  they  may  be  pleased  to  marshal  as  embraced  by  them. 

P. — Who  were  the  prophets,  and  under  what  circumstances  The  pro- 
did  they  make  their  annunciations  ?  body. 

S. — The   prophets    were   a  numerous  body,    and  went  to- 
gether in  bands,   or  companies.      Samuel  told   Saul   that  he 
should  meet  "  a  company  of  prophets,"  who  should  prophecy ; 
and  after  joining  them,  "  the  Spirit  of  God  came  upon  him, 
and   he   prophesied  among  them,"   so   that  the   saying   went 
forth,  "Is  Saul  also  among  the  prophets  ?"(!  Sam.  x.  5-12). 
When  Jezebel  was   destroying  the    prophets,  Obadiah    hid  a 
hundred  of  them  in  caves  (1    Kings  xviii.  4).      Four   hundred 
were  consulted  by  the  kings  of  Judah  and  Israel  in  respect  of 
their  expedition  to  Ramoth-Gilead  (1    Kings  xxii.  6).      Fifty 
men,  "sons  of  the  prophets,"  accompanied  Elijah  and  Elisha 
when   the   former  was   translated   to  heaven  (2    Kings   ii.   7). 
"  Would  God,"  said  Moses,  ''  that  all  the  Lord's  people  were  ' 
prophets,  and  that  the  Lord  would  put  his  Spirit  upon  them  " 


166 


PROPHECY. 


(Num.  xi.  29).      They  were  ordinarily  under  the  guidance  of 
a  chief  prophet  who  presided  over  them.       Thus  Samuel  is 
seen   "  standing  as  appointed  "  over  a  ''  company  of  the  pro- 
phets "  (1   Sam.  xix.  20).      Elisha  has  a  body  of  "the  sons 
of  the   prophets  "  attached  to  him.      These,  on  one  occasion, 
"bowed  themselves  to  the  ground  before  him;"  on  another, 
they  are  seen  "  sitting  before  him  ;  "   and  it  appears  that  they 
resided   with  him  (2   Kings  ii.    15;    iv.    38;    vi.    1).      Elisha 
himself  was  a  disciple  of  Elijah's.      '*  Knowest  thou,"  it  was 
said  to  him,  ''  that  the  Lord  will  take  away  thy  master  from 
thy  head  to-day  ?  "  (2  Kings  ii.  3). 
Prophets  The  prophets   operated  under  the  excitation  of  music  and 

^xcitedby    g^^g        ..J   ^^,.jj  (^pgjj»    g^-j   ^^^  Psalmist,  "my  dark  saying 

upon  the  harp  "  (Ps.  xlix.  4).      "  Miriam,   the  prophetess,  the 
sister  of  Aaron,   took   a  timbrel    in   her   hand,   and   all    the 
women  went   out  after  her  with   timbrels   and  with   dances," 
and  then  we  have  her  utterance  (Ex.  xv.  20,  21).      The  com- 
pany that  Saul  was  sent  to  meet  were  to  be  seen   "  comin<y 
down  from  the  high  place  with  a  psaltery,  and  a  tabret,  and 
a  pipe,  and  a  harp,  before  them."     David,  whose  prophesyings 
are  given  in  the  Psalms,  was  an  accomplished  musician,  and 
encouraged  the  art.      When  the  ark  was  brought  back   from 
the  land  of  the  Philistines,  he  "  and  all  Israel  played  before 
God  with  all   their  might,  and  with  singing,  and  with  harps, 
and  with  psalteries,  and   with  timbrels,  and  with  cymbals,  and 
with  trumpets  "(1  Chron.  xiii.  8  ;  see  also  xv.  28  ;  xvi.  42). 
These  performances  were    instituted   by  the  prophets,  the    in- 
junctions "  of  David,  and  of  Gad  the  king's  seer,  and  Nathan 
the    prophet,"    being    cited    for    them  (2    Chron.    xxix.    25). 
"  Moreover,  David   and  the  captains  of  the  host  separated  to 
the  service  of  the  sons  of  Asaph  and  of  Heman,  and  of  Jedu- 
than,  who   should    prophesy  with    harps,  with   psalteries,   and 
with   cymbals  "  (1  Chron.  xxv.    1-3).      And  when    Elisha   was 
called    upon    to  see  from  whence    help  could  come  when  the 
armies  of  Judah,  Israel,  and  Edom  were  in  peril  from  drought, 
he  said,  "  Now  bring   me  a  minstrel.      And    it  came  to  p'assi 
when   the  minstrel  played,  that  the  hand  of  the  Lord    came 
upon   him,"  and  he  predicted  the  coming  supply,   as  also  the 
overthrow  of  the  Moabites,  against  whom  the   expedition  had 
been  formed  (2  Kings  iii.  11-19). 


PROPHECY. 


167 


This  phrase    of  "  the   hand    of  the   Lord "  coming   on  the  Extatic  ex- 

I      1       •        J  •    i-  r     J.^  •  !•  "i  X  J         citementof 

prophets  is    descriptive  oi    the   species   oi    excitement  under  prophets. 
which  they  gave  forth  their  utterances,  as  if  by  the  power  of 
God  specially  acting  on  them.      When  "  the  hand  of  the  Lord 
was  on  Elijah,"  it  roused  him  to  physical  exertion  ;  "  and  he 
girded  up  his  loins,  and  ran  before  Ahab,"  (who  was  on  horse- 
back,)   ''  to    the    entrance    of   Jezreel  "   (1  Kings  xviii.  46). 
Ezekiel  imagined  himself,  on  such  an  occasion,   bodily   trans- 
ported.      "So  the  Spirit  lifted  me  up,"  he  says,   ''and  took 
me  away  ;  and  I  went  in  bitterness,  in  the  heat  of  my  spirit ; 
but  the  hand  of  the  Lord  was  strong  upon  me  "  (Ezek.  iii.  14). 
At   other  times    the  visitation   introduces  him  to  bewildering 
visions  of  a  whirlwind,  a  fiery  cloud,  and    creatures  of  mons- 
trous form,  and  of  a  fiery  being  who  lifts  him  up  "  between 
the  earth  and  the  heaven,"  and  carries  him  elsewhere  (Ezek. 
i.  3-14  ;  viii.  1-4).      The  impulse  thus  induced  becomes  in- 
fectious.     "  And    Saul  sent  messengers   to  take  David  ;   and 
when  they  saw  the  company  of  the  prophets  prophesying,  and 
Samuel  standing  as   appointed    over  them,  the   Spirit  of  God 
was  upon  the   messengers  of  Saul,  and  they  also  prophesied." 
Saul  sends  in  succession  two  more  parties,  who  are  similarly 
affected,  and  join  in  the  prophesying   (1  Sam.  xix.  20,  21). 
Saul,  we  have  seen,  had  himself  been  so  carried  away  with  the 
spirit  of  prophecy  on  joining  a  company  thus  engaged. 

Dreams,  or  visions  of  the  nidit,  were  a  vehicle  for  receiving  Prophesy- 
the  prophetic  power.      "  If  there  be  a  prophet  among  you,  I  through 
the  Lord  will  make  myself  known  unto  him   in  a  vision,  and  y^^^^  ^'^ 
will  speak  unto  him   in  a  dream  "(Num.  xii.  6).      "The  pro- 
phet that  hath  a  dream,  let  him  tell  a  dream  ;  and  he  that 
hath  my  word,  let  him  speak  my  word  faithfully  "  (Jer.  xxiii. 
28).      "And  when  the  sun  was  going  down,  a  deep  sleep  fell 
upon  Abram  ;  and,  lo,  an  horror  of  great  darkness  fell  upon 
him,"  and  then  was  revealed  to  him  the  coming  bondage  of 
his   descendants   in    Egypt  (Gen.  xv.  12-14).      "Balaam,  the 
son  of  Beor,  hath  said,  and  the  man  whose  eyes  are  open  hath 
said  ;  he  hath  said,  which  heard  the  words  of  God,  and  knew 
the  knowledge  of  the  most  High,  which  saw  the  vision  of  the 
Almighty,  falling  into  a  trance,  but  having  his  eyes  open  ; " 
on  which  he  bursts  forth  into  a  prophetic  annunciation  of  thfe 
prosperity  of   Israel  (Num.  xxiv.    15-19).       Jeremiah,    after 


168 


PROPHECY. 


PROPHECY. 


prophesying    of   the    restoration    of   the    Jews    through    two 
chapters,  says,  "  Upon  this  I  awaked,  and   beheld  ;  and   my 
sleep  was  sweet  unto  me,"  showing  that  the  whole  communi- 
cation had  been  given  to  him   in  a   dream   (Jer.  xxxi.  26). 
"  Daniel  had  a  dream  and  visions  of  his  head  upon  his  bed  • 
then  he  wrote  the  dream,  and  told  the   sum  of  the  matters  "' 
the  result  being  his  prophecy  of  four  great  kingdoms  typi- 
fied to  him  as  four  beasts  (Dan.  vii.  1).     He  has  another  such 
vision  of  wars  between  two  powers   represented  to  him  in  the 
forms  of  a  ram  and  a  goat  butting  at  one  another  (viii.  1-7). 
And  in   the  midst  of  other  such  revelations,  he  says,  "  Then 
was  I   in  a  deep  sleep  on   my  face,  and  my  face   toward  the 
ground  "  (x.  9).     Zechariah  also,  when  similarly  uttering  pro- 
phecies, tells  us,  "  The  angel  that  talked  with  me  came  ao-ain 
and  waked  me,  as  a  man  that  is  wakened  out  of  his  sleep,"  on 
which  he  has  further  revelations  (Zech.  iv.  1) 

ga„*t Son  '^^''!  T'^''}"^^  '''^^"'■''  °f  ^^'^  P'-opl^ets  led  them,  as  might  be 
of  pro-  expected,  to  break  out  in  extravagance  of  action  as  well  as  of 
P"^'-  words.    Saul,  in  his  fit  of  enthusiasm,  "stripped  off  his  clothes 

also,    evidently  as  the  others  had  done,  "  and  prophesied  be- 
fore Samuel  in  like  manner,  and  lay  down  naked  all  that  day 
and  all  that  night.     Wherefore  they  say.  Is  Saul  also  amon^ 
the  prophets"  (1  Sam.  xix.  24)?     David,  though  a  crowned 
monarch,  "  danced  before  the  Lord  with  all  his  might "  when 
bringing  m  the  ark  to  the  sound  of  music  (2  Sam.  'vi    14) 
-L  .jah,  as  we  have  already  seen,  girt  himself  and  ran  before 
Ahabs  horse.      Isaiah,  in  prosecution  of  his  prophetic  exhibi- 
tions, goes  "unto  the  prophetess"  and  procreates  children    to 
whom  significant  names  are  given.      "Behold,"  he  exclaims 
1  and  the  children  whom  the  Lord   hath  given  me  are  for 
signs  and  for  wonders  in  Israel  from  the  Lord  of  hosts"  (Isa 
viii.  3,  1 8),  of  which  children  we,  however,  hear  no  more     He 
dressed,  it  appears,  in  sackcloth,  and  on  one  occasion  imacrined 
he  bad  received  an  order  from  God  to  throw  off  his  clothing 
and  to  go  about  naked  for  a  term  of  years.      "And  the  Lord 
said,"  he  tells  us,   "  like  as  my  servant  Isaiah  hath  walked 
naked  and  barefoot  three  years  for  a  sign  and  wonder  upon 
Egypt  and  upon  Ethiopia ;  so  shall  the  king  of  Assyria  lead 
away  the  Egyptians  prisoners,  and   the  Ethiopians  captives 
young  and  old,  naked  and  barefoot "  (xx.  2-4) ;  a  sio-n   be  it 


169 


I 


remarked,  to  be  exhibited  to  the  Egyptians  and  Ethiopians, 
rather  than  to  the  Israelites,  and  for  which   there  is  no  re- 
corded fulfilment.      Ezekiel   fancied  that  he  devoured  a  roll 
inscribed    with   denunciations   against   his  people.      "Son   of 
man,"  he  thought  it  said  to  him,  "  be  not  thou  rebellious  like 
that  rebellious  house  :  open   thy  mouth,  and  eat  that  I  give 
thee.     And  when  I  looked,  behold  an  hand  was  sent  unto  me; 
and  lo,  a  roll  of  a  book  was  therein  ;  and  he  spread  it  before 
me  ;  and   it  was  written  within  and   without :  and  there  was 
written  therein  lamentations,  and  mourning,  and  woe.      More- 
over  he   said  unto  me,  son    of  man,   eat  that  thou  findest ; 
eat    this    roll,    and     go     speak    unto    the    house    of    Israel 
So  I  opened    my   mouth,    and    he    caused    me    to    eat    that 
roll."      Then   he   is   told  to  go   and  communicate   the  words 
to  the   Israelites,   but  was   at   the  same   time  warned,   "the 
house  of  Israel  will  not  hearken  unto  thee"  (Ezek.  ii.  8-10  • 
111.  1-y),  so  that  the  exhibition  went  for  nothing.     Afterwards, 
the  spirit  takes  him  up  and  carries  him  to  the  captives  of  his 
people  by  the  river  of  Chebar.      And   he  says,  "  I  sat  where 
they  sat,  and  remained  astonished  among  them  seven  days," 
at    the    close    of    which    he   receives   further   communications 
(iii.  14-1 G).     His  patience  underwent  a  severer  trial.     He  was 
told  by  his  divine  monitor  to  make  a  mock  siege  of  Jerusalem 
with  a  tile  and  an  iron  pan.      "This,"  it  was  said,  "shall  be  a 
sign  to  the  house  of  Israel,"  but  scarcely  of  a  description  to 
impress  them.      And  then  he  was  required   to  lie  three  hun- 
dred and  ninety  days  on  his  left  side  to  represent  that  he  was 
in  some  way  bearing  the  sins  of  the  house  of  Israel,  and  forty 
on  his  right  side  for  the  sins  of  Judah,  each   day  signifying  a 
year.      And  it  was  said,  "  behold,  I  will  lay  bands  upon  thee, 
and   thou  shalt  not  turn  thee  from  one  side  to  another,  till 
thou  hast  ended  the  days  of  thy  siege.''      And  then   his  daily 
portion  of  food  and  drink  was  prescribed  to  him,  and  he  was  to 
bake  it  with  human  ordure,  afterwards  changed  at  his  remon- 
strance to  that  of  the  cow  (iv.  1-17).      Here  we  have  a  repre- 
sentation of  a  siege  of  Jerusalem  for  the  astounding  period  of 
four  hundred  and  thirty  years.      By  whom  maintained  it  is 
not  said,  nor,  of  course,  has  there  been  any  such  fulfilment. 
Hosea  imagined  that  to  him  was  assigned  the  revolting  task  of 
raising  up  children,  at  one  time  from  a  harlot,  at  another  from 


170 


PROPHECY. 


PROPHECY. 


171 


The  stated 
prophets. 


Prophecies 
recorded 
after 
events. 


Eras  of  the 
prophets. 


an  adulteress,  acts  predictive  of  judgments  on  Israel,  and  whicli 
he  accordingly  carried  out  (Hos.  i.  1-11;  iii.  1-5). 

It  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  the  numerous  persons  who  are 
designated  prophets  were  continually  engaged  in  giviug  forth 
predictions.  That  was  a  power  exercised  only  occasionally, 
and  probably  but  by  few  of  them.  They  occupied  themselves 
in  thanksgivings  and  praises  of  God,  which  are  accounted  as 
"prophesyings"  (1  Chron.  xxv.  3).  Some  of  the  prophetic 
annunciations  are  given  in  methodical  form,  while  others  are 
scattered  here  and  there  in  the  midst  of  historic  narrative  and 
poetic  effusions,  in  which  latter  certain  of  the  prophets,  such 
as  Isaiah  and  the  Psalmists,  largely  indulge.  The  stated  pro- 
phets, whose  writings  have  been  handed  down  to  us,  are  in 
the  Old  Testament  but  sixteen  in  number.  In  the  New  Tes- 
tament, the  four  evangelists  record  predictions  attributed  to 
Jesus,  and  the  Apocalypse  is  devoted  to  the  subject,  as  the 
title  of  the  book,  namely  a  Revelation,  indicates. 

P. — In  a  former  conversation  you  showed  that  the  writings 
of  the  Old  Testament  were  apparently  put  into  their  present 
shape  not  earlier  than  the  time  of  Ezra.  How  does  such  a 
conclusion  bear  upon  the  so-called  prophecies  as  predictions 
made  before  the  events  described  therein  took  place  ? 

>S'. — Very  decidedly.  The  prophecies  relate  to  what  was  to 
befal  the  Jews  as  a  nation,  to  judgments  on  other  nations  sur- 
rounding them,  and  to  their  expected  Messiah.  Taking  the 
return  from  the  captivity  in  Babylon,  or  the  time  of  Ezra,  as  a 
standing  point,  much  of  the  history  had  already  been  accom- 
plished when  the  scriptures  were  made  public  by  Ezra  and 
Nehemiah.  No  announcement,  consequently,  of  events  that 
had  then  gone  by,  can  be  accepted  as  predictions  of  them  before 
their  occurrence,  although  put  forward  in  the  form  of  prophecies. 
It  would  be  as  if,  in  the  present  day,  a  book  were  issued,  in  the 
pages  of  which  were  introduced,  as  prophecies,  events  of  the 
times  of  William  the  Conqueror  or  Charles  the  First. 
P. — At  what  time  did  the  stated  prophets  live  ? 
S. — The  earliest  of  these  is  Jonah,  who  is  thought  to 
have  written  about  B.C.  862.  No  testimony  for  the  Bible 
can,  however,  be  deduced  from  his  prophecy,  for  it  consisted 
merely  in  a  denunciation  against  Nineveh,  which,  even  by  his 
own  showing,  was  not  fulfilled.      He  professes  to  have  been 


commissioned  by  God  to  announce  to  the  Ninevites  that  in 
forty  days  their  city  was  to  be  overthrown,  and  adds,  that  on 
their  humbling  themselves  in  penitence,  ''  God  repented  of  the 
evil  that  he  had  said  that  he  would  do  unto  them  ;  and  he  did 
it  not"  (iii.  4,  10).  This,  you  will  observe,  indicates  a  want 
of  prescience  in  the  prophet,  and  a  change  of  purpose  in  God, 
not  consistent  with  divine  operations.  It  is  this  prophet, 
moreover,  who  gives  out  the  incredible  story  of  being  swallowed 
up  by  a  whale.  I  will  then  class  six  together  in  the  order  in 
which  they  are  said  to  have  written,  namely  Joel,  Amos, 
Hosea,  Isaiah,  Micah,  and  Nahum,  who  are  thought  to  have 
flourished  from  B.C.  800  to  B.C.  71  3.  These,  you  will  observe, 
are  embraced  within  the  limits  of  a  century.  After  this  I  will 
so  classify  eight  more,  namely  Zephaniah,  Jeremiah,  Habakkuk, 
Daniel,  Ezekiel,  Obadiah,  Haggai,  and  Zechariah,  who  are  said 
to  have  written  from  B.C.  630  to  B.C.  519,  the  last  occupying 
from  the  latter  year  to  B.C.  487.  These  therefore  took  up  rather 
more  than  a  century;  and  within  that  century  was  embraced 
the  captivity  in  Babylon,  which  lasted  from  B.C.  599  to  B.C. 
536.  This  body  of  eight  are  therefore  associated  with  the 
time  of  Ezra.  There  remains  the  prophet  Malachi  who  is 
supposed  to  have  written  in  B.C.  397.  The  result  is,  that 
taking  into  view  the  two  thousand  years  of  the  history  of  the 
Jews,  namely  from  Abraham  to  the  Christian  dispensation,  we 
have  but  two  periods,  of  about  a  century  each,  occurring  in  the 
latter  half  of  that  era,  replete  with  prophetic  writings,  and  a 
void  of  any  such  productions  during  the  remaining  time. 

P. — I  gather  from  what  you  tell  me  that  prophecy  must 
have  induced  prophecy  ;  namely,  that  at  certain  periods,  and 
there  seem  to  have  been  but  two  such,  and  both  of  but  limited 
extent,  a  spirit  of  prophesying  arose  and  spread  itself  from  man 
to  man.  Seeing  the  excitement  to  which  these  persons  were 
subject,  especially  when  in  contact  with  one  another,  the 
thought  naturally  presents  itself,  that  their  predictions  sprang 
from  human  influences  of  time  and  circumstance,  and  not  from 
divine  inspiration.  Half  of  these  prophets,  for  example,  lived 
in  or  near  the  time  of  the  captivity,  which  you  have  already 
noticed  was  one  of  religious  ferment  and  literary  activity,  when 
just  such  ^effusions  might  be  naturally  expected.  Is  the 
authenticity  of  these  writings  beyond  dispute  ? 


I 


172 


PROPHECY. 


PROPHECY. 


173 


S- — Two,  and  those  in  which  the  most  important  manifesta- 


ques- 
tioned. 

Isaiah 
composite. 


Authenti- 
city of 

Isaiah  and    tions  are  made,  namely  Isaiah  and  Daniel  are  much  called  in 

Daniel  ,  • 

question. 

The  writings  ascribed  to  Isaiah  are  evidently  of  a  composite 
order.  There  is  so  marked  a  transition  at  the  end  of  the  39th 
chapter  that  it  is  common  among  critics  to  speak  of  a  first  and 
a  second  Isaiah,  as  the  respective  authors  of  these  two  divisions. 
Hengstenberg,  who  labours  to  support  the  integrity  of  the 
scriptures,  is  driven  to  recognise  the  diversity  of  style  and 
subject  which  has  led  others  to  ascribe  these  portions  to 
different  writers.  "The  first  part,''  he  observes,  "containing 
the  predictions  which  the  prophet  uttered  for  the  present 
generation,  during  the  time  of  his  ministry,  consists  mainly  of 
single  prophecies  which,  separated  by  time'and  occasion,  were 
first  made  publicly  known  singly,  and  afterwards  united  in  a 
collected  whole,  having  been  marked  out  as  different  prophecies, 
either  by  inscriptions  or  in  any  other  distinguishable  way, — the 
second  part,  destined  as  a  legacy  for  posterity,  forms  a  con- 
tinuous, collected  whole."  The  one,  he  calls,  "  the  rebukino* 
and  threatening  mission  of  the  prophet,"  and  the  other  "  the 
comforting  mission."  "  If  it  be  acknowledged,"  he  says,  "  that 
the  prophesying  activity  of  Isaiah  falls  into  two  great  divisions, 
the  one,  contained  in  the  first  thirty-nine  chapters,  pre-eminently 
destined  for  the  present,  the  other,  chiefly  for  the  future  ;" 
this,  he  appears  to  think,  accounts  for  the  variation  of  style, 
evidencing  merely  the  versatility  of  the  writer.^ 

There  are  passages  in  Isaiah  which  are  common  to  other 
writers,  and  show  that  the  one  has  copied  from  the  other,  or 
that  both  have  made  use  of  a  common  document.  Thus  chap, 
ii.  2-4  is  identical  with  Micah  iv.  1-3  ;  chap.  xiii.  6  with  Joel 
i.  15  ;  and  chap.  Hi.  7  with  Nahum  i.  xv.  Chapters  xv. 
and  xvi.,  which  are  entitled  "  The  burden  of  Moab,"  come 
from  some  older  record,  of  which  it  is  said,  "This  is  the  word 
that  the  Lord  hath  spoken  concerning  Moab  since  that  time ; " 
contrasted  with  which  is  introduced  a  fresh  prophecy,  thus, 
"But  now  the  Lord  hath  spoken,  saying,"  &c.  (xvi.  13,  14)  ; 
and  there  is  an  historical  passage,  occupying  from  chapter  xxxvi. 
to  xxxix.,  which  is  taken  from  three  chapters  in  the  2d  book 
of  Kings,  namely,  chapters  xviii.  13  to  xx.  19.  Now  the 
1  Christology  of  Old  Testament,  II.  164,  166,  174,  193. 


book  of  Kings  closes  with  the  captivity  in  Babylon,  bringing 
the  compilation  ascribed  to  Isaiah,  consequently,  onwards  to 
that  time.  It  becomes  therefore  quite  accountable  that  Cyrus 
should  be  referred  to  by  name  in  Isaiah  as  the  deliverer  of  the 
people  from  this  captivity. 

The  particulars  I  have  above  made  use  of  are  pointed  out 
by  Dr  Rowland  Williams  in  his  work  on  the  Hebrew  prophets. 
He  treats  of  what  critics  calls  the  first  Isaiah,  and  shows  this 
portion  to  be  of  a  very  composite  order.  In  the  chapters 
from  i.  to  xv.  some  marked  transitions  occur.  Chapters  i.  to 
xii.  relate  to  the  "  days  of  Uzziah,  Jotham,  Ahaz,  and  Hezekiah, 
kings  of  Judah,"  and  the  invasions  of  the  Assyrians  in  tlie  two 
latter  reigns,  concluding  with  the  year  B.C.  710.  The  Assyrian 
rule  gave  place  to  that  of  Babylon.  At  chapter  xiii.  we  have 
"the  Burden  of  Babylon,"  ending  at  chapter  xiv.  23.  This 
refers  to  the  overthrow  of  the  Babylonish  dynasty  by  Cyrus, 
which  took  place  from  B.C.  550  to  530  ;  after  which,  in 
chapter  xiv.  23-27,  the  earlier  and  expired  empire  of  Assyria 
is  a"-ain  brought  on  the  field.  The  Burden  of  Babylon  has 
thus  been  thrust,  by  some  compiler,  into  the  midst  of  what 
related  to  Assyria  nearly  two  centuries  earlier.  Then  the 
14th  chapter  concludes  with  what  respects  the  times  of  Aliaz, 
and  this  must  be  out  of  place,  as  the  earlier  portion,  concluding 
with  chapter  xii.,  had  been  brought  down  to  the  posterior 
reiffn  of  Hezekiah. 

After  this,  from  chapter  xv.  to  the  end  of  chapter  xix.,  there 
are  various  "burdens,"  or  denunciations,  namely,  of  Moab, 
Damascus,  Ethiopia,  and  Egypt.  These  have  the  character  of 
distinct  productions,  and  the  burden  of  Moab,  as  already  pointed 
out,  appears  to  have  come  from  an  older  source. 

Then  chapter  xx.  brings  us  again  to  the  Assyrian  empire, 
when  the  king's  general.  Tartan,  invaded  Ashdod  in  the  land 
of  the  Philistines  (2  Kings  xviii.  17),  or  B.C.  710.  At  chapter 
xxi.,  as  far  as  verse  10,  there  is  a  leap  forwards  to  the  fall  of 
Babylon,  B.C.  550  to  530.  After  this,  to  the  close  of  chapter 
xxiii.,  come  various  "  burdens,"  namely,  of  Idumea,  Arabia, 
the  Valley  of  Vision,  and  of  Tyre,  all  seemingly  distinct  pro- 
ductions. The  burden  of  the  Valley  of  Vision  relates  to  Jeru- 
salem in  tbe  times  of  Eliakim  and  Shebna  the  scribe  (2  Kings 
xviii.  18),  when  we  are  taken  back  to  the  reign  of  Hezekiah, 
or  B.C.  710. 


— brought 
to  period 
of  capti- 
vity. 


Transitions 
from  times 
of  Assyria 
to  times  of 
Babylon. 


Detached 
prophecies. 


Times  of 
Assyria 
and  of 
Babylon. 


■■I  .  f 


174 


PROPHECY. 


PROPHECY. 


175 


Idumea. 


The  final 
section 
given  in 
three 
parts. 


From  chapter  xxiv.  to  the  end  of  chapter  xxxiii.  are  a  group 
of  utterances  expressive  of  lamentation,  hopes  of  redemption, 
visitation  on  Samaria,  the  downfall  of  Assyria,  and  the  re-estab- 
lishment of  Jerusalem.  This,  Dr  Williams  concludes,  is  ''  the 
probable  end  of  the  primary  Isaiah,"  whose  out-pourings,  how- 
ever, have  been  interrupted  in  various  ways  by  the  introduction 
of  distinct  predictions  from  independent  hands,  as  already 
pointed  out. 

Chapters  xxxiv.  and  xxxv.  relate  to  a  judgment  on  Idumea 
and  the  renovation  of  Judea.  From  style  and  matter  Dr 
Williams  considers  this  the  production  of  another  writer,  who 
may  have  lived  about  B.C.  500.  After  this  comes  the  extract 
ah-eady  refeired  to  from  the  2d  book  of  Kings,  which  closes 
with  the  thirty-ninth  chapter. 

The  concluding  section,  from  the  fortieth  chapter  to  the  end, 
is  recognised  as  the  work  of  one  and  the  same  writer.  It  is 
replete  with  exalted  thoughts  of  the  deity,  given  forth  in  noble 
language  and  in  poetic  strain.  This  section  consists  of  three 
pieces  which  have  been  brought  together  by  some  editing 
hand.  The  first  announces  comfort  to  Israel  and  the  downfall 
of  Babylon,  the  deliverer  Cyrus  being  introduced  by  name. 
The  prophet,  writing  however  as  if  the  speech  were  that  of 
God,  prides  himself  in  being  able  thus  precisely  to  designate 
his  hero.  "I  have  surnamed  thee,"  he  says,  "though  thou 
hast  not  known  me "  (xlv.  4).  "  There  was  an  interval," 
observes  Dr  Williams,  "  according  to  Herodotus,  between  the 
first  conflict  of  Cyrus  with  the  Babylonians  and  his  capture  of 
their  city,"  during  which  an  exiled  Jew,  excited  by  the  sur- 
roun(]ing  influences,  may  have  seen  in  the  sword  of  Cyrus  the 
intervention  of  Jehovah.^  Or,  which  is  even  more  probable, 
these  utterances  may  have  occurred  after  the  event.  The 
prophet,  observes  Hengstenberg,  takes  his  stand  in  the  time 
of  the  captivity.^  The  first  section  closes  at  chapter  xlviii. 
with  the  words,  "  There  is  no  peace,  saith  the  Lord,  unto  the 
wicked."  The  next  ends  with  the  same  words  at  the  termina- 
tion of  chapter  Ivii.  The  third  is  contained  in  the  remaining 
nine  chapters.  The  subject  of  these  portions  is  the  redemption 
and  renovation  of  the  Jewish  people,  with  passages  pointing  to 
their  Messiah. 

»  Hebrew  Prophets,  293.  «  Christology  of  Old  Testament,  II.  16a 


The  prophecies  that  have  come  down  to  us  in  the  name  of 
Isaiah,  consist  thus  of  different  predictions,  by  separate  writers, 
which  have  been  put  together,  without  regard  to  subject  or 
order  of  time,  some  of  which  may  be  ascribed  to  the  true 
Isaiah  who  lived  in  the  time  of  Hezekiah  (2  Kings  xix.  2) 
B.C.  710,  and  others  that  must  be  attributed  to  various  per- 
sons of  later  days,  spreading  over  some  two  centuries  more, 
and  bringing  us  to  that  period  so  prolific  in  biblical  litera- 
ture, namely  that  of  the  return  of  the  exiles  from  the 
captivity  in  Babylon. 

The  book   of  Daniel  is  cast   in  the  time  of  the   captivity,   Daniel  not 
but  is  evidently  of  a  much  later  day.      Its  origin  is  even   of  canon. 
a  more  untrustworthy  character  than  that  of  Isaiah.      In  the 
Hebrew  scriptures  this  w^ork  has  no  place  with  those  of  the 
other  fifteen  prophets  who  are  considered  inspired,  but  appears 
in  a  subsequent  collection  together  with  Ecclesiastes,  Solomon's 
Song,  Esther,  Chronicles,  and  Psalms,  which,  though  accounted 
sacred  writings,  are  so  in  a  lower  sense.      Daniel  is  not  men- 
tioned   by  Haggai  and  Zechariah,  who  come    close   after  the 
return  from   the   captivity,  nor  by  Ezra  or  Nehemiah.      The 
author  of  the  apocryphal  book  Ecclesiasticus,  who  is  supposed 
to  have  written   B.C.    200,'"  in  citing  the  praises  of  the  dis- 
tinguished persons  of  his  people,  notices,  among  others,  Isaiah, 
Jeremiah,    and   Ezekiel,   and    the    twelve    prophets,   meaning 
evidently    those   termed   the  minor  prophets,    from  Hosea  to 
Malachi  (chaps,   xlviii.  and  xlix.),  but   he  says   not  a  word    of 
Daniel.    And  in  the  Septuagint,  the  apocryphal  writings  called  — asso- 
the  History  of  Susannah,  the  Prayer  of  Azarias  followed  by  Apocry- 
the  Song  of  the  Three  Children,  and  Bel  and  the  Dragon,  are  p^- 
incorporated   and   mixed  in  with    the   book   of  Daniel.      The 
Chaldee  of  Daniel,  says  Dr  Rowland  Williams,  is  more  allied 
to  that  of  the  Targums  or  Chaldee  paraphrases  of  the  Hebrew 
scriptures,  than  to  that  of  Ezra.      In  the  History  of  Susannah, 
which  is  bound  up  with  Daniel,  is  a  Greek  play  upon  a  word,  —brought 
and  the  terms  used  in  Daniel  (iii.  5,  10,  15)  for  harp,  sack-  thnes!''^" 
but,  psaltery,  and  dulcimer,  are  Greek. ^ 

Josephus,  to  uphold  the  prophetic  character  of  the  work,  as 
well  as  to  exalt  his  nation,  has  a  stor}^  of  Alexander  the  Great 

^  Daniel,  by  the  Rev.   P.   S.  Desprez,  with  Introduction  by  Dr  Rowland 
Williams,  xi.-xix.,  xxiv.,  xxv.  ;  also  11,  14-17. 


176 


PROPHECY. 


having  seen  tlie  high  priest  Jaddua  in  a  dream,  and  been 
encouraged  by  him  to  conquer  Asia  ;  and  of  Alexander  march- 
ing from  Tyre  to  Jerusalem,  when  the  same  high  priest,  in 
bodily  person,  met  him,  and  shoAved  him  the  predictions  con- 
cerning himself  in  Daniel.  This,  however,  is  understood  to 
be  a  scene  dressed'  up  by  Josephus  four  centuries  after  the 
period  of  Alexander,  none  of  the  Greek  historians  having 
knowledge  of  any  such  march  upon  Jerusalem.^ 

The  fact  is,  whatever  is  historical  in  Daniel,  namely  the 
prevalence  of  the  dominion,  first  of  Persia,  and  then  of  Greece, 
after  the  overthrow  of  the  Babylonish  power  ;  the  struggles 
between  the  successors  of  Alexander  in  Syria  and  Egypt,  de- 
picted as  the  kings  of  the  north  and  the  south  ;  and  the 
persecution  of  the  Jews  by  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  styled  the 
"  vile  person,"  though  presented  in  form  of  prophecy,  must 
have  been  written  after  the  events.  The  victories  of  the 
Maccabees  could  not  have  been  overlooked  had  the  writer 
been  endowed  with  prevision  ;  but,  occurring  after  his  time, 
and  lying  thus  beyond  the  field  of  his  knowledge,  they  have 
no  place  in  the  book, 
—unreal  in  Desprez  points  out  various  particulars  indicating  the  unre- 
racnts.  liability  of  the  writer,  some  relating  to  himself,  and  some  to 
the  Babylonish  dynasties,  with  the  particulars  of  which  he 
must  have  been  well  acquainted,  had  he  lived  in  those  days, 
and  held,  as  he  represents,  a  high  office  in  the  state. 

There  are  circumstances,  such  as  that  Nebuchadnezzar  set 
up  an  image  of  gold  of  the  stupendous  height  of  sixty  cubits, 
or  a  hundred  feet  ;  that  Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abednego 
remained  unscathed  in  a  fiery  furnace,  and  Daniel  untouched 
by  hungry  lions  in  a  den ;  and  that  Nebuchadnezzar,  becoming 
mad,  lived  upon  ''  grass  as  oxen  "  for  seven  years,  which  are 
of  an  unreal  character,  showing  a  similarity  of  type  between 
this  book  and  the  apocryphal  writings  with  which  it  was 
originally  incorporated.  Of  himself,  Daniel  says  that  he 
"  continued  unto  the  first  year  of  King  Cyrus  "  (i.  21).  What 
became  of  him  afterwards  is  not  stated,  and  the  phrase  is  such 
as  to  raise  the  inference  that  he  was  not  his  own  historio- 
grapher.     But   overlooking  this   limit,  the  writer  afterwards 


1  Daniel,  by  Desprez,  xxxv.,  xxxvi,,  15, 16. 


PROPHECY. 


177 


errors. 


speaks  of  a  vision  he  had  "  in  the  third  year  of  Cyrus  "(x.  l); 
and  elsewhere  he  leaves  it  to  be  concluded  that  he  flourished 
throughout  that  reign.      "  So  this  Daniel,"  he  says,  "  prospered 
in  the  reign  of  Darius,  and  in  the  reign  of  Cyrus  the  Persian  " 
(vi.  28).     In  one  place  (i.  5)  he  intimates  that  he  and  others 
were  maintained  for  three  years,  "  that  at  the  end  thereof  they 
might  stand  before  the  king."     At  another  (ii.  1,  13-16),  we 
find   him  recognised  in  the  second  year  of  the  reign  among 
the    wise   men,    or    magicians,  of   the  realm,    on    whom  the 
king  habitually  depended,  and  having  liberty  of  access  to  him 
as  such.      And  had  he  been  a  real  character,  writing  his  own 
history,  he  could  not  have  indulged  in  the  self-praise  appear- 
ing in  various  passages  of  the  book  (i.    19,    20  ;  v.    11,    12  ; 
vi.  3,   4).      In  the  historical  parts,  from  chapter  i.  to  vi.,  the 
third  person  is  employed  ;  and  in  the  prophetical,  from  chapter 
vii.  to  the  end,  the  first  person  is  used,  and  in  an  ostentatious 
manner. 

As  respects  historic  particulars,  Nebuchadnezzar  is  said  to  Historic 
have  besieged  Jerusalem  in  the  third  year  of  kmg  Jehoiakim 
(i.    1) ;   whereas,  according  to  Jeremiah  (xxv.  1),  he  did  not 
come  to  his  throne  till  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim.  Moreover, 
near  the  close  of  his  fifth   year  Jehoiakim  was  still  ruling  in 
peace  (Jer.  xxxvi.  9);  and  Nebuchadnezzar,  we  eventually  see, 
did   not  come  against  Jerusalem  till  Jehoiakim  had   reigned 
there   eleven  years  (2  Chron.  xxxvi.  5,  6).      In  Daniel  (v.  2, 
11,  18),  Belshazzar  is  represented  to  have  been  the  son  and 
successor  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  the  downfall  of  the  kingdom 
is  stated  to  have  occurred  in  his  time  ;  whereas,  pursuant  to 
Jeremiah  (lii.  31),  Evil-Merodach  was  his  successor,  and  the 
kingdom  was  not  to  be  overthrown  till  the  days  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar's son's  son  (xxvii.  7).     At  the  taking  of  the  city,  Bel- 
shazzar is  said  to  have  been  slain  (Dan.  v.  30),  but  pursuant 
to  history  the  then  ruler  of  Babylon  was  spared  and  made 
governor    of   a    principality.^     The    succession,    according    to 
Josephus,  was   from   Nebuchadnezzar  to  Evil-Merodach,  who 
reigned  eighteen  years;  then  to  his  son  Niglissar  or  Neriglissar, 
who  reigned  forty  years  ;   afterwards  to  his  son  Laborsordacus, 
who  lasted  but  nine  months  ;  and  then  to  Baltasar  or  Naboar- 
delus  in  whose  time  was  the  conquest  by  Cyrus.^     The  book 
I  Desprez's  Daniel,  28.  '  Idem,  57,  note. 


178 


PROPHECY. 


PROPHECY. 


179 


Apocalypse 
founded  on 
book  of 


of   Daniel,    observes    Dr  Williams,    "presents    four  kings  in 
succession,    Nebuchadnezzar,   Belshazzar,    Darius,  and    Cyrus, 
whom  no  discoverable  history  arranges  in  that  order,  even  could 
the  identity  of  Belshazzar  or  Darius  the  Mede  be  ascertained."^ 
The  Apocalypse,  the  only  professed  prophetical  work  in  the 
New  Testament,   is  equally  unreliable  in  its  origin.       It   is 
Enoch  and   largely  derived  from  the  apocryphal  book  of  Enoch,  as  I  have 
shown  on  a  previous  occasion  ;  and  Desprez,  citing  some  other 
writer,  traces  out  its  obligations  to  Daniel.      "From  Daniel" 
the  author  of  the  Apocalypse   "takes  his  historical    concep- 
tion of  Pagan  empire,  arising  brute-like  out  of  the  sea;   his 
vision  of  the  Son  of  Man  ;    his  king  of  the  fierce  counten- 
ance ;  his  Michael,  the  great  prince,  the  guardian  angel  of  the 
sacred  Hebrew  nation;  his  resurrection,  judgment,  and  kingdom 
of  God."     Both  books,  Desprez  observes,  appear  to  have  been 
written  under  circumstances  of  persecution  for  conscience  sake. 
In  the  one,  there  is  a  "  time  of  trouble  such  as  never  was  since 
there  was  a  nation,  even  to  that  same  time  ;"  in  the  other, 
there  is  "  the  hour  of  temptation  which  shall  come  upon  all  the 
world,  to  try  them  that  dwell  upon  the  earth."  The  one  speaks  of 
many  who  "shall  be  purified  and  made  white  and  tried,"  and  the 
other  of  the  souls  of  white-robed  martyrs  crying  under  the  altar 
for  vengeance.     These  persecutions  endure,  according  to  Daniel, 
for  "a  time,  times  and  an  half,"  "a  thousand  two  hundred  and 
ninety  days "  being  also  mentioned,  while  the  periods  in  the 
Apocalypse  are  " a  time,  times,  and   half  a   time,"  and   "a 
thousand    two   hundred    and  threescore    days."      The   angelic 
messenger  of  Daniel  is  described  as  clothed  in   linen,  girded 
with  gold,  with  eyes  as  lamps  of  fire,  feet  like  polished  brass, 
and  a  voice  like  that  of  a  multitude,  on  seeing  whom  Daniel 
fell  on  his  face ;  particulars  all  adopted  by  the  author  of  the 
Apocalypse  for  the  Son  of  Man,  at  whose  feet  he  fell.     The 
personage  in  Daniel  stands  on  the  waters  of  the  rivers,  and 
raising  his  hands  swears  that  the  period  shall  be  for  a  time, 
times,  and  a  half ;  while  an  angel  in  the  Apocaljrpse,  standing 
upon  the  sea  and  lifting  up  his  hand,  swears  that  time  shaJl  be 
no  longer.      Many  other  resemblances  follow,  presenting  such 
an  amount  of  "  verbal  imitation  "as  to  make  the  one  book  "  a 
transcript "  of  the  other. ^ 

1  Desprez's  Daniel,  xlvii.  and  p.  28.  «  Idem,  218-240. 


i. 


The    judgment    on    Babylon    in    the    Apocalypse,    though  Prophecy 

.  Ti  1  'it  1  •  ^^  Babylon 

almost  universally  applied  to  another  city  than  the  ancient  taken  from 
capital  of  Chaldea,  is  expressed  in  terms  evidently  taken  from  jeTemkh. 
Isaiah  and  Jeremiah.  There  are  in  common  between  them 
its  whoredom  or  idolatries  (Rev.  xvii.  1,  2  ;  Jer.  1.  38) ;  its 
sitting  "  on  many  waters,"  or  domineering  over  other  countries 
(Rev.  xvii.  1,  15,  18  ;  Jer.  xxvii.  2,  3,  6,  7;  li.  13);  its  cor- 
ruption of  these  lands  of  whose  wine  "all  nations  have  drunk" 
(Rev.  xvii.  2,  5;  xviii.  3;  Jer.  li.  7);  its  "mouth  opened  in 
blasphemy  against  God — and  them  that  dwell  in  heaven,"  im- 
pelling it  to  say,  "  I  will  exalt  my  throne  above  the  stars  of 
God : — I  will  be  like  the  Most  High  "  (Rev.  xiii.  5-8  ;  xvii.  3, 
5  ;  Isa.  xiv.  4,  12-14  ;  Jer.  1.  29  ;  li.  53) ;  its  greatness,  mak- 
ing it  pre-eminently  "  Babylon  the  great,"  "  Babylon,  the  glory 
of  kingdoms,"  "  the  praise  of  the  whole  earth"  (Rev.  xvii.  5  ; 
Isa.  xiii.  19;  xiv.  4;  xlvii.  5,  8  ;  Jer.  li.  41);  its  fall ; — "Baby- 
lon is  fallen,  is  fallen,"  says  the  one  prophet,  "Babylon  is 
fallen,  is  fallen,"  re-echoes  the  other  (Rev.  xiv.  8  ;  xviii.  2  ; 
Isa.  xxi.  9);  its  occupation  by  every  foul  spirit"  and  "every 
unclean  and  hateful  bird."  "  Wild  beasts  of  the  desert  shall 
lie  there  ;  and  owls  shall  dwell  there,  and  satyrs  shall  dance 
there,  and  dragons  in  their  pleasant  palaces"  (Rev.  xviii.  2  ; 
Isa.  xiii.  21,  22  ;  Jer.  1.  39  ;  li.  37).  "  Come  out  of  her,  my 
people,"  says  the  one  prophet,  "  that  ye  be  not  partakers  of 
her  sins,  for  her  sins  have  reached  unto  heaven,  and  God  hath 
remembered  her  iniquities ; "  as  had  exclaimed  the  other, 
"  Flee  out  of  the  midst  of  Babylon,  my  people,  go  ye  out  of 
the  midst  of  her,  and  deliver  ye  every  man  his  soul  from  the 
fierce  anger  of  the  Lord"  (Rev.  xviii.  4,  5  ;  Jer.  li.  6,  9,  45). 
"  Reward  her  even  as  she  rewarded  you,  and  double  unto  her 
double  according  to  her  works.  How  much  she  hath  glorified 
herself,  so  much  torment  and  sorrow  give  her."  "As  she  hath 
done,  do  even  to  her.  Recompense  her  according  to  her  work ; 
for  she  hath  been  proud  against  the  Lord,  against  the  Holy 
One  of  Israel  "  (Rev.  xviii.  6,  7  ;  Jer.  1.  15,  29).  "For  she 
saith  in  her  heart,  I  sit  a  queen,  and  am  no  widow,  and  shall 
see  no  sorrow.  Therefore  shall  her  plagues  come  in  one  day, 
death,  and  mourning,  and  famine;  and  she  shall  be  utterly 
burned  with  fire."  "  Come  down,"  had  said  the  earlier  pro- 
phet,  "  and  sit  in  the  dust,  O  virgin  daughter  of  Babyloa — ► 


180 


PROPHECY. 


Thou  saidst,  I  shall  be  a  lady  for  even — I  shall  not  sit  as  a 
widow,  neither  shall  I  know  the  loss  of  children  :  but  these 
two  things  shall  come  to  thee  in  a  moment  in  one  day,  the 
loss  of  children   and  widowhood. — Behold,  they  shall  be  as 
stubble  ;  the    fire   shall   burn   them :    they  shall   not   deliver 
themselves  from  the  power  of  the  flame"    (Rev.  xviii.  7,  8  ; 
Isa.  xlvii.  1-14).      "  For  strong  is  the  Lord  God  who  judgeth 
her."      "  Their  Redeemer  is  strong  ;  the  Lord  of  hosts  is  his 
name"  (Rev.  xviii.  8  ;  Jer.  L  34).      "The  kings  of  the  earth 
shall  bewail  her — the  merchants  of  the  earth — and  every  ship- 
master— weeping  and  wailing."     "  At  the  noise  of  the  taking 
of  Babylon  the  earth  is  moved,  and  the  cry  is  heard  among  the 
nations  "    (Rev.  xviii.  9,  11,  17,  19  ;    Jer.  1.  46).       "  When 
they  shall  see  the  smoke  of  her  burning.      They  shall   stand 
afar  off  for  the  fear  of  her  torment."      "  And  Babylon  shall  be 
as   when   God   overthrew    Sodom   and    Gomorrah."      "  I   will 
kindle  a  fire  in  his  cities,  and  it  shall  devour  all  round  about. 
I  will  make  thee  a  burnt  mountain  "    (Rev.  xviii.  9,  15  ;  Isa. 
xiiL  19  ;   Jer.  1.  32  ;  11  25,  58).      "  In  one  hour  is  thy  judg- 
ment.     In  one  hour  so  great  riches  is  come  to  nought.      In 
one  hour  is  she  made  desolate."      "  Desolation  shall  come  upon 
thee  suddenly."     "  Destroy  her  utterly  :  let  nothing  of  her  be 
left."      ''Babylon  is  suddenly  fallen  and  destroyed"  (Rev.  xviii. 
10,  17,  19  ;   Isa,  xlvii.  11  ;  Jer.  1.  26  ;  li.  8).      "Alas,    alas, 
that  great  city  that  was  clothed  in  fine  linen,  and  decked  with 
gold,    and    precious   stones,    and   pearls!"      "How   hath   the 
golden    city    ceased!     Thy   pomp    is    brought    down   to   the 
grave."     •"  Thou  shalt  no  more  be  called  tender  and  delicate, 
the  lady  of  kingdoms."     "  Abundant  in  treasures,  thine  end  is 
come"    (Rev.  xviii.  16  ;   Isa.  xiv.  4,  11  ;  xlvii.  1,  3,  5  ;  Jer. 
li.  13).      "Rejoice  over  her;  for  God  hath  avenged  you  on 
her."      "Then   the   heaven  and   the   earth,    and   all   that   is 
therein,  shall  sing   for   Babylon  :  for  the  spoilers  shall  come 
unto  her."      "  The  whole  earth  is  at  rest,  and  is  quiet :   they 
break  forth  into  singing.      Yea,  the  fir  trees  rejoice  at  thee — 
saying,  since  thou  art  laid  down,  no  feller  is  come  up  against 
us"  (Rev.  xviii.  20;  Jer.  11  48;   Isa.  xiv.  5-8).     She    is    to 
fall   "  like  a  great   millstone    cast   into   the  sea. — Thus  with 
violence  shall   that  great  city  Babylon  be  thrown  down,  and 
shall  be  found  no  more ; "  a  figure  used  by  the  earlier  prophet 


'' 


PROPHECY. 


181 


who  likened  her  fall  to  a  "stone  cast  into  the  midst  of 
Euphrates."  "Thus,"  he  added,  "shall  Babylon  sink,  and 
shall  not  rise  from  the  evil  that  I  will  bring  upon  her  "  (Rev. 
xviii.  21  ;  Jer.  li.  63,  64).  In  all  these  prophecies  sorceries 
are  imputed  to  her,  and  the  blood  of  the  saints,  and  that  of 
all  slain  on  earth  (Rev.  xviii.  23,  24  ;  Isa.  xiv.  4-7  ;  xlvii.  6, 
12;   Jer.  1.  11,  23,  28,  33,  34  ;  li.  4,  5,  24,  25,  35-37,  49). 

The  Apocalypse  is  thus  not  an  independent  record,  but  de- 
rived from  other  sources,  and  some  of  them  clearly  unauthentic; 
and  it  is  not  to  be  wondered  at  tliat  in  the  early  ages  it  was 
by  considerable  bodies  not  acknowledged  as  an  inspired  oracle, 
and  was  finally  admitted  into  the  canon  of  the  scriptures  with 
hesitation  and  difficuUy. 

p Thank  you.      You  certainly  show  the  hand  of  man  to 

have  been  freely  used  in  these  productions.  Isaiah,  I  per- 
ceive, may  be  in  portions  the  genuine  work  of  the  prophet 
bearing  that  name,  but  whoever  interspersed  and  incorporated 
therewith  the  effusions  of  the  other  nameless  writers,  may  have 
been  also  guilty  of  tampering  with  the  original  record.  The 
other  two  works,  namely  Daniel  and  the  Apocalypse,  it  seems 
to  me,  deserve  to  be  placed  among  those  Apocrypha  with  which 
they  are  found  so  intimately  associated. 

I  must  say,  in  view  of  what  you  have  now  put  before  me,  I 
expect  little  satisfaction  from  what  are  called  the  prophetic 
writings.  Still  I  should  be  glad  to  have  as  full  an  idea  of 
their  nature  and  title  to  consideration  as  you  can  conveniently 

give  me. 

^._The  subject  is  a  lengthy  one,  requiring  arrangement 
and  considerable  attention.  I  can  best  introduce  it  to  you  by 
puttino-  into  your  hands  a  paper  I  have  by  me,  in  wluch  the 
chief  prophecies  are  set  forth,  and  their  merits  discussed  with 
freedom.      This  you  can  return  to  me  at  your  leisure. 


The 

bondaji^e  in 
Egypt. 


PEOPHECT. 


VI. 

THE  PROPHECIES  DISCUSSED. 

The  prophecies  relating  to  the  Jewish  nation  naturally  first 
present  themselves  to  notice.  The  most  marked  interpositions 
of  God,  in  miraculous  action,  are  considered  to  have  been  in 
their  favour,  and  their  existing  state,  as  associated  with  their 
past  history,  is  commonly  appealed  to  as  presenting  standing 
tokens  of  the  accomplishment  of  prophecy. 

(1.)  God  is  stated  to  have  announced  to  Abraham,  propheti- 
cally, that  his  descendants  were  to  undergo  bondage  in  Egypt, 
but  as  the  Pentateuch  contains  indications  of  having  been  put 
together  subsequent  to  the  captivity  in  Babylon,  or  nearly  a 
thousand  years  after  the  exodus  from  Egypt,  it  is  apparent 
that  what  relates  to  the  Israelites  while  in  Egypt  cannot  be 
accepted  as  the  result  of  pre-vision.  This  so-called  prophecy, 
moreover,  though  requiring  preciseness  of  fulfilment,  is  not 
shown  to  have  met  therewith.  The  terms  are,  "  know  of  a 
surety  that  thy  seed  shall  be  a  stranger  in  a  land  that  is  not 
theirs,  and  shall  serve  them ;  and  they  shall  afflict  them 
four  hundred  years. — In  the  fourth  generation  they  shall  come 
hither  again  "  (Gen.  xv.  13, 16).  It  is  not  possible  to  reconcile 
these  terms  together,  for  four  generations  cannot  be  made  to 
spread  over  such  a  period  as  four  hundred  years.  The  Bible 
chronologists  steer  clear  of  this  difficulty,  but  only  by  reducing 
the  stay  in  Egypt  and  so  falsifying  the  prophecy.  The  migra- 
tion is  placed  at  B.C.  1706,  and  the  exodus  at  B.C.  1491, 
leaving  an  interval  of  but  two  hundred  and  fifteen  years.  And 
this  has  still  to  be  lowered.  The  period  of  the  prophecy 
relates  to  the  time  durinsr  which  the  Israelites  were  to  "serve" 


-r 


PROPHECY. 


183 


the  Egyptians  and  be  "  afflicted"  by  them.     This  condition  of 
servitude  was  not  imposed  upon  them  until  after  the  death  of 
Joseph  and  all  his  generation,  and  was  the  act  of  some  king 
who  had  had  no  knowledge  whatever  of  Joseph  (Ex.  i.  6-8). 
Now  Joseph  is  represented  to  have  died  at  the  age  of  a  hundred 
and  ten,  in  B.C.  1G35,  or  seventy-one  years  after  the  migration. 
Supposing  even  that  he  was  the  last  survivor  of  his  generation, 
and  that  the  persecution  set  in  the  year  after  his  death,  which 
in  itself  is  against  probability,  there  remain  but  a  hundred  and 
forty-four  years  to  the  exodus  to  set  against  the  four  hundred 
of  the  prophecy.     And  then  there  is   an  attempt  to  show 
exactitude  in  the  fulfilment  of   the  prophecy,  in  which    the 
limitation  of  the  time  to  the  period  of  the  persecution  is  again 
overlooked,  and  a  fresh  error  introduced.     "Now  the  sojourning 
of  the  children  of  Israel,  who  dwelt  in  Egypt,  was  four  hundred 
and  thirty  years.      And  it  came  to  pass  at  the  end  of  the  four 
hundred  and  thirty  years,  even  the  self-same  day  it  came  to 
pass,  that  all  the  hosts  of  the  Lord  went  out  from  the  land  of 
E'Typt  "  (Ex.  xii.  40,  41).    Why,  in  this  aim  at  precision,  even 
to°a  day,  the  four  hundred  years  should  have  been  converted 
into  four  hundred  and  thirty,  it  is  hard  to  understand. 

(2.)  When  Abraham  was  caUed  out  from  his  own  country  inie^Jew, 
into  Canaan,  certain  promises  were  made  him.      "I  will  make  g^eat^ 
of  thee,"  God  said,  "  a  great  nation.     In  thee  shall  all  famihes 
of  the  earth  be  blessed.     I  wiU  make  thy  seed  as  the  dust  of 
the  earth  :  so  that  if  a  man  can  number  the  dust  of  the  earth, 
then  shall  thy  seed  also  be  numbered  "   (Gen.  xii.  2,  3  ;  xiu. 
16).     These  promises  have  not  been  fulfilled.     As  a  people, 
the  descendants  of  Abraham  occupied  a  region  representing  a 
space  of  but  about  two  hundred  and  ten  miles,  by  an  average 
breadth  of  seventy.      They  found  it  difficult  to  hold  their  own 
with  the  petty  tribes  around  them,  and  when  they  came  into 
collision  with  any   of  the  considerable  states,   were  at  once 
brought  under  their  subjection.    They  have  never  been  "a  great 
nation,"  or  of  the  least  importance  in  the  world  as  a  people. 
They  failed  to  attract  the  notice  of  ancient  historians.    "  Hero- 
dotus, writing  of  Egypt  on  one  side,  and  of  Babylon  on  the 
other,  visiting  both  places,  and  of  course  almost  necessarily 
passing  within  a  few  miles  of  Jerusalem,"  and  writing  even      . 
of  Syria,  makes  no  mention  of  the  existence  of  this  people. 


184 


PROPHECY. 


Grant  of 
promised 
land. 


Boundaries 
of  the  land. 


Diodorus  Siculus  says  nothing  of  them.  They  are  passed  over 
in  silence  by  Pythagoras  and  Plato.  Alexander  the  Great 
ignored  them,  to  remedy  which  Josephus  has  forged  the  passage 
of  his  interview  with  the  high  priest  Jaddua.^  Insignificant  as 
they  were  when  united,  after  the  reign  of  their  third  king, 
Solomon,  they  split  up  into  two  petty  states  that  were  in  con- 
stant warfare  with  each  other.  Throughout  their  sacred  history 
they  were  steeped  in  idolatries,  engaged  in  struggles  with  their 
enemies,  torn  by  internal  dissensions,  repeatedly  subject  to  the 
dominion  of  oppressors,  and  at  times  carried  off  bodily  into 
captivity.  Unblessed  themselves,  they  have  assuredly  proved 
no  blessing  to  any  other  people,  far  less  to  the  earth  at  large. 

(3.)  Their  land  is  said  to  have  been  conferred  upon  them 
specially  by  God.  "Lift  up  now  thine  eyes,"  Abraham  was  told, 
"  and  look  from  the  place  where  thou  art,  northward,  and  south- 
ward, and  eastward,  and  westward  :  for  all  the  land  which  thou 
seest  to  thee  will  I  give  it,  and  to  thy  seed  for  ever. — Arise, 
walk  through  the  land  in  the  length  of  it  and  in  the  breadth 
of  it;  for  I  will  give  it  unto  thee"  (Gen.  xiii.  14-17). 

In  making  a  gift  of  land,  it  is  reasonable  to  expect  that  the 
limits  of  the  grant  should  be  accurately  defined.  But  nothing 
can  be  more  uncertain  than  the  area  conferred  upon  the 
Israelites.  Abraham  was  told  that  the  possession  should  ex- 
tend "  from  the  river  of  Egj^t  unto  the  great  river,  the  river 
Euphrates"  (Gen.  xv.  18);  and  elsewhere  it  is  specified  that 
the  "  bounds  "  should  be  "  from  the  Red  Sea,  even  unto  the 
sea  of  the  Philistines."  (Ex.  xxiii.  31),  This  may  be  said  to 
embrace  the  Peninsula  of  Sinai,  reaching  northwards  to  the 
line  of  the  Orontes  and  Euphrates.  It  might  even  compre- 
hend all  Arabia  from  the  Nile  to  the  Persian  Gulf.^  But 
when  we  come  to  the  actual  occupation  of  the  land,  when  the 
boundaries  are  described  with  details  aiming  at  exact  precision, 
the  grant  becomes  so  reduced  in  its  limits  as  to  be  entirely  irre- 
concileable  with  the  promise  to  Abraham. 

This  account  appears  in  Exodus  xxxiv.  There  were  three 
contiguous  tribes  with  whom  the  Israelites  were  associated, 
that  is  the  Edomites,  the  Moabites,  and  the  Ammonites.  The 
limits  given  in  the  prior  statements,  reaching  from  the  Red  Sea 
to  the  Euphrates,  would  include  the  whole  of  their  possessions; 

*  Higgins'  Anacalypsis,  I.  432,  772,  773.         »  See  Keith's  Land  of  Israel. 


I 

\ 


1 


PROPHECY. 


185 


It 


H 


but,  on  the  other  hand,  we  find,  at  the  period  of  the  occupa- 
tion, that  these  tribes  were  not  to  be  interfered  with,  their 
lands  being  reserved  to  them  because  of  their  consanguinity  to 
the  Israelites.  Accordingly  a  boundary  is  then  laid  down 
excluding  them. 

"  Thou  shalt  not  abhor  an  Edomite,"  the  Israelites  were 
cautioned,  "for  he  is  thy  brother "  (Deut.  xxiii.  7).  The  direct 
route  to  be  pursued  by  the  Israelites  would  take  them  through 
the  land  of  the  Edomites,  and  they  asked  for  a  passage.  To 
this  they  had  been  encouraged  by  a  positive  assurance  from 
God.  "  Ye  are  to  pass  through  the  coast  of  your  brethren,  the 
children  of  Esau  (they  were  told),  which  dwell  in  Seir  ;  and 
they  shall  be  afraid  of  you  "  (Deut.  ii.  4).  The  event,  how- 
ever, proved  otherwise.  A  most  conciliatory  message  was  sent 
on  the  part  of  the  Israelites  to  the  Edomites  to  induce  them 
to  let  them  pass  through,  but  this  Arab  horde,  not  fearing  the 
Israelitish  host,  numbering,  as  they  did,  six  hundred  thousand 
God-led,  fighting  men,  turned  out  against  them  "  with  much 
people,"  and  "  with  a  high  hand  "  drove  them  from  their 
border,  and  so  Israel  meekly  prosecuted  their  journey  by  some 
other  way  (Num.  xx.  14-21).  The  Edomites  were  descended 
from  Esau,  the  brother  of  Jacob,  and  the  Moabites  and  Am- 
monites were  the  progeny  of  Lot,  the  nephew  of  Abraham. 
All  aggression  on  the  territories  of  these  tribes  was  strictly 
prohibited.  ''  Meddle  not  with  them  ;  for  I  will  not  give  you 
of  their  land,  no  not  so  much  as  a  footbreadth  ;  because  I 
have  given  Mount  Seir  unto  Esau  for  a  possession. — When 
thou  comest  nigh  over  against  the  children  of  Ammon  distress 
them,  not,  nor  meddle  with  them ;  for  I  will  not  give  thee  of 
the  land  of  the  children  of  Ammon  any  possession,  because  I 
have  given  it  unto  the  children  of  Lot  for  a  possession  "  (Deut. 
ii.  5,  19).  The  interdict  as  to  Edom  and  Ammon  included 
Moab,  who  lay  between  them.  The  border  laid  down  in  Exodus 
xxxiv.,  running  along  the  line  of  the  Jordan  and  the  Dead  Sea, 
carried  out  these  arrangements,  placing  the  land  of  Israel  clear 
of,  and  within,  the  territories  of  Edom,  Moab,  and  Ammon.  It 
becomes,  consequently,  inexplicable  that  the  grant  should  ever 
have  been  expressed  elsewhere  in  terms  to  absorb  the  whole  of 
these  interdicted  regions. 

The  difficulties,  however,  extend  still  further.     The  object 


r 


, 


s 


186 


PROPHECY. 


of  Moses  was  to  keep  the  Israelites  within  the  limits  assigned 
to  them,  in  obedience  to  the  command  he  had  received  from 
Cod.  ''This,'  he  was  told,  "is  the  land  that  shall  fall  unto 
you  for  an  inheritance,  even  the  land  of  Canaan  with  the  coasts 
thereof ;"  and  then  the  particular  bounds  thereof  were  described 
to  him,  including  the  Eastern  boundary  as  running  in  the  line 
of  the  Jordan.  But  as  the  people  came  to  enter  upon  the 
possession,  two  tribes  and  a  half,  or  nearly  one-fourth  of  the 
host,  insisted  upon  taking  up  their  lots  outside  the  border,  east- 
ward of  the  Jordan,  thus  also  encroaching  upon  the  posses- 
sions of  Moab  and  Ammon.  And  yet,  in  spite  of  all  these 
blemishes,  the  irreconcilable  accounts  of  what  constituted  the 
possession  assigned,  and  the  wilful  and  independent  act  of  a 
large  section  of  the  people  in  helping  themselves  to  lands  where 
they  pleased  to  make  their  selection,  we  are  called  upon  to  view 
the  land  of  Israel  as  a  special  grant  to  this  people,  pre-ordained 
and  conferred  upon  them  by  God. 

Confining  ourselves,  however,  to  the  boundaries  described  in 
detail  in  the  account  appearing  in  Ex.  xxxiv.,  incertitude  is  still 
the  character  of  the  grant.      One  limit  to  the  southward  was 
what  is  called  "the  river  of  Egypt."     This  would  naturally 
mean  the  Nile.     But  the  Israelites,  after  quitting  Egypt,  never 
had  footing  on  its  banks,  and  were  in  fact  to  be  kept  clear  of  that 
region.    "  Ye  shall  henceforth  return  no  more  that  way"  it  was 
enjoined  upon  them  (Deut.  xvii.  16).     Interpreters,  therefore, 
ordinarily  select  an  insignificant  stream  more  to  the  eastward  to 
which  they  hesitate  not  to  apply  the  distinguishing  name  of  "the 
river  of  Egypt ;"  but  "what  river  this  was,"  says  the  more  can- 
did Michaelis,  "  is  uncertain.''^    The  northern  boundary  is  also 
uncertain.      It  was  to  take  off  from  the  coast  of  the  Mediter- 
ranean in  the  direction  of  Mount  Hor,   and  to  run  by  the 
entrance  of  Hamath  through  Zedad  and  Ziphron  to  Hazarenan. 
There  is  a  Mount  Hor  spoken  of  as   "  in  the  edge  of  the  land 
of  Edom  "  (Num.  xxxiii.  37),  where  Aaron  died ;  but  that  being 
to  the  southward  is  not  the  mount  in   question.      "  In  geo- 
graphy," says  Michaelis,  referring  to  the  mount  under  considera- 
tion,   "  we  know  nothing  of   mount  Hor,"  ^  nor  are  Zedad, 
Ziphron,  or  Hazarenan,  laid  down  in  any  map.     "  The  entrance 


1  On  the  Laws  of  Moses,  I.  64 


«  Idem,  I.  59. 


PROPHECY. 


187 


of  Hamath,"  or  a  valley  leading  into  the  district  so  called,  is 
alone  discernible. 

The  title  of  the  Israelites  to  the  land  of  Canaan,  as  depend-  Possession 
ing  upon  a  grant  from  God,  is  thus  wanting  in  the  essential  of 
definitiveness  to  show  in  what  the  grant  consisted.  It  is  also 
wanting  in  another  feature  belonging  to  such  a  title,  namely 
that  it  should  be  accompanied  by  possession.  The  land  had 
been  in  the  occupation  of  other  people  from  time  immemorial. 
If  God  deprived  these  of  their  right,  and  conferred  their  terri- 
tories upon  the  Israelites,  there  should  have  been  some  act  on 
his  part  expressive  of  the  transfer.  But  there  was  nothing  of  the 
kind.  The  Israelites  had  to  help  themselves  to  the  land  as  best 
they  might ;  and  they  did  so  by  dislodging  and  exterminating, 
as  far  as  they  were  able,  the  existing  inhabitants.  Their  title, 
therefore,  was  one  by  conquest,  not  by  gift.  Nor  was  the  title 
by  conquest,  supposing  that  to  have  proceeded  from  divine  ordi- 
nance, secured  free  of  the  ingredient  of  failure  attaching  to 
mere  human  operations. 

The  occupation  of  the  two  and  a  half  tribes  outside  the  Operations 
assigned  limits  was  a  violation  of  the  terms  of  the  grant,  and  umits. 
there  was  another  serious  infraction  in  the  interference  of  the 
Israelites  with  the  excluded  tribes  of  Edom,  Moab,  and 
Ammon,  which,  strange  to  say,  is  attributed  to  the  direct  causa- 
tion of  God.  "  The  Lord,"  we  are  told,  "  strengthened  Eglon, 
the  king  of  Moab,  against  Israel ;  and  he  gathered  the  child- 
ren of  Ammon  and  Amalek  and  went  and  smote  Israel.  So 
the  children  of  Israel  served  Eglon,  the  king  of  Moab,  eighteen 
years"  (Jud.  iii.  12-14).  After  this  there  was  constant  war- 
fare with  these  tribes  with  varying  success.  Four  hundred  and 
fifty  years  later  Moab  is  spoken  of  as  having  "  rebelled  against 
Israel."  Saul,  the  first  king  of  Israel,  attacked  them,  as  also 
Edom,  accounting  them  all,  not  as  allies,  but  enemies.  He 
fought  *'  against  Moab,  and  against  the  children  of  Ammon,  and 
against  Edom,  and  "vexed  them"  (1  Sam.  xiv.  47).  So  also 
the  next  king,  David,  the  model  ruler.  He  "  dedicated  unto 
the  Lord  "  the  treasures  of  which  he  despoiled  the  nations 
"subdued"  by  him,  among  whom  were  Moab  and  Ammon.  ' 
"  And  he  put  garrisons  in  Edom  ;  throughout  all  Edom  put  he 
garrisons,  and  all  they  of  Edom  became  David's  servants.  Ana 
the  Lord,"  it  is  added  approvingly,  "preserved  David  whither- 


I 


/t 


188 


PROPHECY. 


PROPHECY. 


189 


soever  he  went "  (2  Sam.  viii.  12-14).  His  hostility  was  car- 
ried to  a  bitter  and  cruel  extreme.  He  went  himself  to  Edom 
together  with  Joab  "the  captain  of  the  host."  '*  For  six 
months  did  Joab  remain  there  with  all  Israe.  until  he  had  cut 
off  every  male  in  Edom"  (1  Kings  xi.  15,  IG). 
Non-pos-  Such  was  the  aggression,  domination,  and  occupation  of  ter- 

wTthfn  the    ritory,  in  violation  of  the  divine  instructions,  and   in  excess  of 
limits.  the  right  by  grant.      On  the  other  hand,  the  failure  to  carry 

out  what  was  ordained,  and  to  lay  hold  of  the  possessions  in- 
cluded in  the  divine  grant,  was  equally  remarkable. 

The  northern  boundary,  as  has  been  seen,  is  not  to  be  de- 
fined from  the  data  given.  Mount  Hor  not  being  known,  the 
question  is,  how  far  up  the  coast  of  the  Mediterranean  north- 
ward the  limits  were  to  reach.  In  the  maps  Mount  Carmel  is 
the  extreme  point  given  on  the  coast,  after  which  the  boundary 
is  made  to  trend  inland,  so  as  to  exclude  Tyre,  and  beyond  it 
Sidon.  But  this,  though  in  keeping  with  the  actualities,  is 
not  consistent  with  the  scripture  requirements,  which  appear 
to  include  these  dominions  in  the  territories  assigned  to  the 
Israelites.  "  Now  Joshua,"  we  are  told,  "  was  old  and  stricken 
in  years ;  and  the  Lord  said  unto  him.  There  remaineth  yet 
very  much  land  to  be  possessed.  This  is  the  land  that  yet 
remaineth."  Various  lands  are  mentioned,  among  which  is 
"  Mearah,  that  is  beside  the  Sidonians  ;"  and  afterwards  God  is 
said  to  have  declared,  "  All  the  inhabitants  of  the  hill  country 
from  Lebanon  into  Misrephoth-maim,  and  all  the  Sidonians, 
them  will  I  drive  out  from  before  the  children  of  Israel"  (Josh, 
xiii.  1-6).  Asher  was  the  tribe  located  in  this  direction,  and 
it  is  made  a  reproach  to  them  that  they  had  not  ejected  the 
Sidonians.  "  Neither  did  Asher  drive  out  the  inhabitants  of 
Accho,  nor  the  inhabitants  of  Zidon.  But  the  Asherites  dwelt 
among  the  Canaanites,  the  inhabitants  of  the  land  :  for  they 
did  not  drive  them  out"  (Jud.  i.  31,  32).  Accho  is  on  the 
coast  to  the  south  of  Tyre,  as  Sidon  is  to  the  north.  If  Her- 
mon  is  the  mount  referred  to  as  Hor,  then  a  line  from  the 
coast  to  that  mount  would  pass  just  close  to  the  town  of  Sidon. 
The  divine  command  respecting  all  tliese  Canaanites  was, 
"  Thou  shalt  smite  them,  and  utterly  destroy  them;  thou  shalt 
make  no  covenant  with  them,  nor  show  mercy  unto  them" 
(Deut.  vii.  2).     Very  different,  however,  was  the  conduct  of 


the  model  king  as  respects  Tyre,  for  he  established  friendly 
relations  with  Hiram,  its  ruler,  and  drew  from  him  artificers 
and  materials  for  the  construction  of  his  palace  (2  Sam.  v. 
1 1).  Solomon  went  to  the  length  of  entering  into  a  compact 
with  the  Canaanitish  sovereign,  and  this  for  the  purpose  of  en- 
abling him  to  build  the  temple.  He  paid  for  the  labour  sup- 
plied him  in  grain,  wine,  and  oil,  and  furthennore  bestowed 
upon  Hiram  "  twenty  cities  in  the  land  of  Galilee"  (1  Kings 
ix.  11  ;  2  Chron.  ii.  3-10).  Thus  the  command  of  God  was 
set  aside  in  order  to  advance  the  service  of  God,  and  one  who, 
with  his  people,  should  have  been  exterminated  according  to 
the  divine  appointment,  was  endowed  with  a  number  of  cities 
actually  appertaining  to  the  Lord's  inheritance. 

The  western  boundary  was  to  be  the  Mediterranean,  stretch- 
ing from  "  the  river  of  Egypt"  to  a  line  with  Mount  Hor.      In 
the  southern  half  of  this  line,  along  the  coast,  lay  the  land  of 
the  Philistines,  who  were  never  dispossessed.      This  was  not 
from  want  of  will,  but  of  power.       They  were  among  those 
whom  Joshua  failed  to  eject  (Josh.  xiii.  3).       Strange  to  say, 
God,  who  had  appointed  this  land  to  the  Israelites,  not  only 
failed  to  enable  them  to  occupy  it,  but  "  he  sold  them  into  the 
hands  of   the   Philistines"  (Jud.   x.   7)  ;  and  they   stood  out 
against  the  Israelites,  and  held  their  own,  throughout  the  whole 
period  of  their  sacred  history.      We  hear  of  them  waging  war 
with  Israel  in  the  times  of  Saul  and  David;  they  were  occupy- 
ing this  territory  as  "  the  land  of  the  Philistines"  in  the  time 
of  Elisha  (2  Kings  viii.  1,  3)  ;  and  in  the  reign  of  Ahaz  they 
invaded   the  possessions  of  the  Israelites,   and  wrested  frona 
them  various  places,  whereupon  they  themselves  ''  dwelt  there" 
(2  Chron.  xxviii.  18).    They  were  still  a  nation,  and  denounced 
amongst  the  enemies  of  the  Israelites,  as  far  onwards  as  the 
times°of  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,   Amos,  Obadiah,  Zephaniah,  and 
Zechariah.      The  latest  of  these  prophets  shows  they  were  not 
only  unejected  but  unsubdued  in  his  day,  saying,   "  I  will  cut 
off  the  pride  of  the  Philistines"  (Zech.  ix.  6)  ;  and  that  is  the 
last  we  hear  of  them.       This  prophet  wrote  B.C.  487,  close 
upon  a  thousand  years  after  the  Israelites  had  crossed  over 
Jordan,  under  Joshua,  to  take  formal  possession  of  the  "  inheri- 
tance "  God  had  conferred  upon  them. 

If  it  is  singular  that  God  should  have  bestowed  Palestine 


190 


PROPHECY. 


PROPHECY. 


191 


Inability 
to  eject 
Canaan- 
ites. 


on  the  descendants  of  Abraham  as  a  special  mark  of  his  favour, 
and  yet  not  have  accompanied  the  gift  with  possession,  but  left 
them  to  install  themselves  by  conquest,  it  is  still  more  extraor- 
dinary that  he  should  not  have  given  them  the  ability  to  carry 
out  his  purposes  by  ejecting  those  whom  they  had  to  displace. 
The  one  were  to  come  in  as  God's  peculiar  people,  he  reigning 
over  them  as  their  national  ruler, — ''  they  have  not  rejected 
thee,"  he  is  represented  as  saying  to  Samuel,  when  they  sought 
to  be  under  a  human  sovereign,  "but  they  have  rejected  me, 
that  I  should  not  reign  over  them"  (1  Sam.  viii.  7), — the 
other  were  to  be  visited  as  prominent  sinners,  when  their  ini- 
quity had  ripened  to  judgment  (Gen.  xv.  1 6).  And  yet,  when 
the  set  time  had  arrived  for  fulfilling  these  designs,  when  the 
chosen  people,  disciplined  in  the  wilderness,  moved  into  the 
land  to  take  up  their  inheritance,  and  "  the  iniquity  of  the 
Amorites"  had  become  "  full"  for  visitation,  power  was  wanting 
to  execute  the  divine  will,  even,  as  it  is  alleged,  on  the  part  of 
the  divinity  himself. 

"  As  for  the  Jebusites,  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem,  the 
children  of  Judah  could  not  drive  them  out  "  (Josh.  xv.  63). 
This,  the  very  throne  of  God  (Jer.  iii.  17  ;  xvii.  J  2),  and  the 
seat  of  his  worship,  could  not  be  purged  from  the  presence  of 
the  condemned  idolaters.  The  Ephraimites  did  not  clear 
their  portion  of  the  ancient  occupants,  nor  did  the  children  of 
Manasseh  clear  theirs  (Josh.  xvi.  10;  xvii.  12,  13).  This 
was  in  the  time  of  the  appointed  leader  Joshua.  After  he 
had  passed  away  the  Lord  is  represented  as  asking,  "  Who 
shall  go  up  for  us  against  the  Canaanites  first,  to  fight  against 
them  ? "  And  he  is  made  to  give  the  answer  himself. 
"  Judah  shall  go  up  :  behold,  I  have  delivered  the  land  into  his 
hand."  And  after  this  we  are  told,  "  And  the  Lord  was  with 
Judah  ;  and  he  drave  out  the  inhabitants  of  the  mountain, 
but  could  not  drive  out  the  inhabitants  of  the  valley,  because 
they  had  chariots  of  iron "  (Jud.  i.  1,  2,  19);  so  that  the 
power  of  God  sufficed  in  dealing  with  the  hill  tribes,  but  was 
unequal  to  cope  with  the  better  equipped  inhabitants  of  the 
plains.  Neither  did  Manasseh  succeed  in  clearing  his  allot- 
ment, "  but  the  Canaanites  would  dwell  in  that  land."  Neither 
did  Ephraim,  or  Zebulon,  or  Asher,  or  Naphtali,  or  Dan,  ac- 
complish  their    tasks    (Jud.  i.  27-36).       Two    entire    tribes. 


Keuben  and  Gad,  as  we  have  seen,  took  up  their  portions 
outside  the  appointed  inheritance.  There  remain  ten  tribes 
whose  operations  have  to  be  considered.  Of  these,  six  are 
named  in  the  chapter  of  Judges  above  cited  as  not  able  to 
dispossess  those  who  were  to  be  ejected  ;  and  two  other  tribes, 
namely,  Simeon  and  Dan,  as  we  have  seen,  were  held  at  bay 
as  to  their  lots  by  the  Philistines.  Of  the  proceedings  of 
Benjamin  and  Issachar  we  hear  nothing,  perhaps  from  the 
extreme  insignificance  of  their  lots.  And  the  failure  con- 
tinued even  to  the  prosperous  reign  of  Solomon,  who,  four 
hundred  and  fifty  years  after  the  first  occupation  under  Joshua, 
had  still  to  put  up  with  the  presence  of  the  condemned  Gen- 
tiles. "  And  all  the  people  that  were  left  of  the  Amorites, 
Hittites,  Perizzites,  Hivites,  and  Jebusites,  which  were  not  of 
the  children  of  Israel,  their  children  that  were  left  after  them 
in  the  land,  whom  the  children  of  Israel  also  were  not  able 
utterly  to  destroy,  upon  those  did  Solomon  levy  a  tribute  of 
bond-service  unto  this  day"  (1  Kings  ix.  20,  21),  making,  in 
fact,  with  them  that  species  of  "  covenant,"  to  the  preservation 
of  their  lives,  which  God  had  prohibited. 

The  promise,  or  prophecy,  as  to  their  "  inheritance,"  was  Non-pos- 
thus  far  from  being  fulfilled  in  the  instance  of  the  descendants  Abraham. 
of  Abraham.  But  it  embraced  the  patriarch  also  himself. 
God,  it  is  allowed,  had  "  promised  that  he  would  give  it  to 
him  for  a  possession,  and  to  his  seed  after  him,"  and  yet,  it  is 
equally  allowed,  "he  gave  him  none  inheritance  in  it,  no, 
not  so  much  as  to  set  his  foot  on  "  (Acts  vii.  5). 

And  this  inheritance  was  to  be  held  in  perpetuity.  ''  To  ^/jT-etuity 
thee  will  I  give  it,''  it  was  declared,  "  and  to  thy  seed  for  tance. 
ever."  The  patriarch,  we  see,  never  was  more  than  a  stranger 
and  a  pilgrim  in  the  land  (Heb.  xi.  13).  His  descendants 
had  partial  possession  only,  in  places  totally  excluded,  in 
others  obliged  to  put  up  with  the  joint  occupation  of  the 
ancient  owners.  While  so  holding,  it  was  no  peaceable  and 
undisturbed  enjoyment,  as  might  be  expected  from  a  gift 
divinely  bestowed.  They  were  in  coutinual  hostilities  with 
every  tribe  and  nation  around  them.  All  seemed  greedy  of 
the  bone,  endeavouring  to  snatch  it  from  them.  These  con- 
tentions were  frequently  successful,  the  Israelites  being  brought 
repeatedly   under  hostile  yoke,  and  sometimes   even  carried 


192 


PROPHECY. 


away  into  captivity.  And  the  end  has  been  that  they  have 
been  totally  supplanted.  They  had  about  fifteen  hundred 
years  of  this  incomplete  and  disturbed  possession,  and  for 
eighteen  hundred    their   "  inheritance  "  has   passed  away  to 

strangers. 
Statutes  to        ^4.)   The  statutes  and  ordinances  enjoined  on  the  Israelites 
endure  for    ^^^^  ^^  endure  for  ever.      The  priest's  office  was  to  belong  to 
Aaron  and  his  descendants  under  a  "  perpetual  statute  "  (Ex. 
xxix.   9),  and    the    "priesthood"    was    to    be    "everlasting" 
(Num.  XXV.  13).      They  were  consecrated  by  anointment,  and 
had  observances  in  respect  of  vestments,  washing  the  feet,  and 
abstinence  from  wine,  all  of  which  were  ordained  to  them  by 
a  statute  "  for  ever  "  (Ex.  xxviii.  43  ;  xxx.  21  ;  Lev.  vii.  36  ; 
X.  9).      The  service  of  the  Levitts  was  also  established  "  by  a 
statute  for  ever  "  (Num.  xviii.  23).    The  Passover,  the  Sabbaths, 
the  Holy  Convocation,  the  Day  of  Atonement,  and  the  Feast 
of  Tabernacles,  were  to  be  kept  up  and  observed  "  for  ever  " 
(Ex.  xii.  14;  xxxi.  IG;   Lev.  xxiii.  21,  31,  41).      The  burnt 
offerings,  the  meat   offerings,  the   yearly  atonement,  the   first 
fruits,  the  free-will  offerings,  and  all  the  sacrificial  performances, 
were  in  like  manner  enjoined  and  regulated  "  by  statute  for 
ever"  (Lev.  iii.  17;  vi.  22;  xvi.  34  ;   xvii.  7;  xxiii.  14;   Num. 
XV.  15  ;   xix.  10).      The  perquisites  of  the  priests,  consisting  of 
"  the  heave  offerings  of  all  the  hallowed  things  of  the  children 
of  Israel,"  and  the  show  bread,  were  secured  to  them   "  by 
reason  of  the  anointing,"  "by  an  ordinance  for  ever"  (Ex.  xxix. 
28;   Lev.  vi.  18  ;  vii.  34  ;  xxiv.  9  ;  Num.  xviii.  8,  19).     And 
the  sacred  lamps  were  to  be  kept  burning  "for  ever"  (Ex.  xxvii. 
2 1  ;  Lev.  xxiv.  3).      But  this  provision  of  perpetuity  has  been 
set  at  naught,  and  abrogated,  under  a  new  dispensation.      The 
Jewish  people  have  lost  their  "  inheritance,"  and  therewith  all 
their  distinctive  usages  have  been  abolished.      The  endurance 
"for  ever"  of  the  one  has  proved  as  unreal  as  that  of  the  other. 
The  first  covenant  has  been  accounted  antiquated,  worn  out, 
and  no  more  to  be  respected.      It  was  as  "that  which  decayeth 
and   waxeth  old "  and  is  "  ready  to  vanish  away  "  (Heb.  viii. 
13).    It  was  found  composed  of  "  weak  and  beggarly  elements," 
all  which  were  "  to  perish  with  the  using  "  (Gal.  iv.  9  ;  Col.  ii. 
22),      It  depended  on  "carnal  ordinances  imposed  until  the 
time  of  reformation  "  (Heb.  ix.  10).      Had  "that  first  covenant 


PROPHFCY. 


193 


been  faultless,  then  should  no  place  have  been  sought  for  the 
second"  (Heb.  viii.  7);  bat  being  condemned,  the  "reformation" 
was  made.  Jesus  Christ  was  introduced  as  "the  mediator  of 
a  better  covenant,  which  was  established  upon  better  promises" 
(Heb.  viii.  6).  What  could  be  announced  with  more  solemnity, 
or  earnestness  of  assurance,  than  the  special,  distinctive,  national 
promises  made  to  the  Jews  ?  Nevertheless,  in  the  face  of  the 
"  reform,"  the  whole  have  been  declared  unreal  and  void,  and 
have  been  set  aside  absolutely.  The  priesthood  of  old,  though 
of  divine  appointment,  is  under  the  new  system  declared  to 
have  been  "after  the  law  of  a  carnal  commandment"  (Heb.  vii. 
IG).  The  priest  is  now  taken  "out  of  Juda;  of  which  tribe 
Moses  spake  nothing  concerning  priesthood;"  and  "the  priest- 
hood being  changed,  there  is  made  of  necessity  a  change  also 
of  the  law."  The  present  priesthood,  or  that  of  Jesus,  we  are 
assured  is  to  be  an  "  unchangeable  priesthood  "  (Heb.  vii.  12- 
14,  24).  The  "law  of  commandments,"  contained  in  the  past 
"ordinances,"  ha.s  also  been  "abolished"  (Eph.  ii.  15),  and  "the 
handwriting"  of  these  "ordinances  blotted  out"  (Col.  ii.  14). 

(5.)  Another  special  promise   relates   to   the   kingly  rule.  Perpetuity 
For  this  also  perpetuity  was  pledged.      "  Wlien  thy  days  be  of  dS 
fulfilled,"  was  God's  message  to  David  through  the  prophet 
Nathan,  "  and  thou  shalt  sleep  with  thy  fathers,  I  will  set  up 
thy  seed  after  thee,  which  shall  proceed  out  of  thy  bowels,  and 
I  will  establish  his  kingdom.      He  shall  build  an  house  for  my 
name,  and  I  will  establish  the  throne  of  his  kingdom  for  ever. 
I  will  be  his  father,  and  he  shall  be  my  son.      If  he  commit 
iniquity,  I  will  chasten  him  with  the  rod  of  men,  and  with  the 
stripes  of  the  children  of  men  :  but  my  mercy  shall  not  depart 
away  from  him,  as  I  took  it  from  Saul,  whom  I  put  away  before 
thee.      And  thine  house  and  thy  kingdom  shall  be  established 
for  ever  before  thee  :  thy  throne  shall  be  estabhshed  for  ever  " 
(2  Sam.  vii.  12-lG).      "I  have  found  David  my  servant,"  says 
the  Psalmist ;  "  with  my  holy  oil  have  I  anointed  him. — I  will 
make  him  my  firstborn,  higher  than  the  kings  of  the  earth. 
My  mercy  will  I  keep  for  him  for  evermore,  and  my  covenant 
shall  stand  fast  with  him.    His  seed  also  will  I  make  to  endure 
for  ever,  and  his  throne  as  the  days  of  heaven.    If  his  children 
forsake  my  law,  and  walk  not  in  my  judgments,  if  they  break 
my  statutes  and  keep  not  my  commandments,  then  will  I  visit 

N 


194 


PROPHECY. 


PROPHECY. 


195 


The 
seventy 
yeari  cap- 
tivity. 


their  transgression  with  the  rod,  and  their  iniquity  with  stripes. 
Nevertheless  my  loving  kindness  will  I  not  utterly  take 
from  him,  nor  suffer  my  faithfulness  to  fail.  My  covenant  will 
I  not  break,  nor  alter  the  thing  that  is  gone  out  of  my  lips. 
Once  have  I  sworn  by  my  holiness  that  I  will  not  lie  unto 
David.  His  seed  shall  endure  for  ever,  and  his  throne  as  the 
sun  before  me"  (Ps.  Ixxxix.  20-36).  "For  thus  saith  the 
Lord ;  David  shall  never  want  a  man  to  sit  upon  the  throne  of 
the  house  of  Israel. — If  ye  can  break  my  covenant  of  the  day, 
and  my  covenant  of  the  night,  and  that  there  should  not  be 
day  and  night  in  their  season  ;  then  may  also  my  covenant  be 
broken  with  David  my  servant,  that  he  should  not  have  a  son 
to  reign  upon  his  throne;  and  with  the  Levites  the  priests,  my 
ministers"  (Jer.  xxxiii.  17-21). 

This  last  utterance  is  by  a  prophet  of  the  tribe  of  Levi,  and 
he  took  care  prominently  to  pronounce  for  the  welfare  of  his 
class.       But    where    are    the    Levites  ?       Where    is    Israel  ? 
Where  is  the  throne  of  the  kingdom  ?     And  where  even  any 
descendant  of  the  house  of  David  ?     The  sun  and  the  moon 
endure,   day  and  night  succeed  each  other  in  uninterrupted 
rotation,  but  what  has  become  of  this  sure  and  unchangeable 
covenant  ?     Sins  might  be  committed,  but  these  were  to  be  met 
with   temporary  chastisements.      The   seed  were   to  be  main- 
tained upon   the  insubvertible  throne,  and  the  line  of  David 
were  never  to  be  imseated  as  had  been  that  of  Saul.     But  how 
stand   the  events  ?     David's  realm  was  transmitted  to  his  suc- 
cessor Solomon,  and  held  in  its  integrity  through  that  reign, 
and  that  one  reign  only.     Ten  tribes  out  the  twelve  fell  away 
from  the  next  occupant  of  the  throne  and  "  rebelled  against  the 
house  of  David  unto  this  day  "  (1  Kings  xii.  19).      The  trans- 
mission, according  to  the  promise,  failed  thus  early.    The  poten- 
tate who  was  to  be  made  ''  higher  than  the  kings  of  the  earth" 
was  shorn  of  two-thirds  of  his  already  contracted  and  insignifi- 
cant dominions.      The  exaltation  never  came,  the  throne  has 
been  vacant  for  ages,  and  if  search  were  made  for  a  lineal 
descendant  of  the  stock  assured,  not  one  at  this  day  could  be 
met  with. 

(6.)  The  captivity  in  Babylon  forms  the  subject  of  a  precise 
prophecy.  "  Behold,  I  will  send  and  take  all  the  families  of  the 
north,  saith  the  Lord,  and  Nebuchadnezzar  the  king  of  Babylon, 


* 


my  servant,  and  will  bring  them  against  this  land,  and  against 
the  inhabitants  thereof,  and  against  all  these  nations  round 
about,  and  will  utterly  destroy  them,  and  make  them  an  astonish- 
ment, and  an  hissing,  and  perpetual  desolations. — And  this  whole 
land  shall  be  a  desolation,  and  an  astonishment ;  and  these 
nations  shall  serve  the  king  of  Babylon  seventy  years  "  (Jer. 
XXV.  9-11).  Jeremiah  lived  to  the  time  of  the  captivity,  and 
there  is  no  assurance  that  he  may  not  have  written  this  passage 
after  the  event.  If  so,  the  only  portion  thereof  that  would  be 
prophetic  would  be  the  term  of  the  captivity  which  lay  beyond 
his  day.  And  it  is  quite  possible  that  this  clause  may  have 
been  introduced  by  some  other  hand  after  the  captivity  was 
over.  Even  then  accuracy  was  not  secured,  perhaps  under  the 
temptation  to  use  a  sacred  number  as  expressive  of  the  period. 
The  captivity  was  effected  on  two  several  occasions.  At  the 
first,  the  king  Jehoiachim  was  carried  off,  together  with  the 
treasures  of  the  palace  and  the  temple,  and  all  the  chief  men 
and  warriors  to  the  number  of  ten  thousand,  and  all  the  arti- 
ficers. The  kingdom  was,  however,  still  maintained,  the  throne 
being  conferred  upon  the  king's  brother  Zedekiah  (2  Kings 
xxiv.  10-17).  But  be  proved  rebellious,  and  after  he  had 
reigned  eleven  years,  Nebuchadnezzar  took  Jerusalem  and 
completed  the  captivity.  He  burnt  all  the  habitations  in  the 
city,  destroyed  its  walls,  and  carried  away  the  king  and  the 
whole  population,  leaving  but  a  miserable  remnant  "  of  the 
poor  of  the  land  to  be  vine  dressers  and  husbandmen  "  (2  Kings 
XXV.  1-12).  The  first  act  in  the  captivity  is  stated  to  have 
occurred  B.C.  599,  and  the  last  B.C.  588.  The  captivity  ended 
with  the  proclamation  of  Cyrus,  given  as  in  B.C.  536.  Dating 
the  captivity  from  the  first  period,  it  lasted  sixty-three  years, 
and  from  the  last,  but  fifty-two.  In  neither  case  was  the  pro- 
phetic term  reached.  Evidently  the  crowning  act  of  the 
captivity  is  that  which  presents  the  event  predicted.  It  is  a 
thorough,  not  a  partial  desolation,  that  is  spoken  of.  While 
Zedekiah  was  reigning  in  Jerusalem,  the  utter  destruction 
described  by  the  prophet  had  not  taken  place.  And  thus  it  is 
represented  in  the  Book  of  Chronicles.  What  befel  Zedekiah,, 
his  people,  and  his  city,  happened,  it  is  declared,  "  to  fulfil  the 
word  of  the  Lord  by  the  mouth  of  Jeremiah  "  (2  Chron.  xxxvi. 
2 1).     The  prophetic  period  is  thus  in  error  by  eighteen  years. 


m:i'mimii^60ifiwf»jf^^ 


196 


PROPHECY. 


ri^3  (7).   There  is  another  precise  period   affecting  the   Jews 

seventy        prophesied  of.      "  Seventy  weeks,"  it  is  said,  *'  are  determined 
ZTmli        upon  thy  people  and   upon  thy  holy  city,  to  finish  the  trans- 
gression, and  to  make  an  end  of  sins,  and  to  make  reconcilia- 
tion for  iniquity,  and    to  bring  in  everlasting  righteousness, 
and  to  seal   up  the  vision  and   prophecy,  and   to  anoint  the 
most  Holy."     This  period  was   to  date  "  from  the  going  forth 
of  the   commandment  to   restore   and   to  build    Jerusalem" 
(Dan.  ix.  24).      The   term  rendered   "  weeks "  is  a  period   of 
seven,  and  the  common  acceptation  is  that  this   means  seven 
years.      The  prophecy,  therefore,  would  embrace   490    years. 
There  are  considerable  diversities   of  opinion  as  to  which  of 
the  edicts  for  the  restoration  of  Jerusalem,  its  temple,  and  its 
walls,  is  that  from  which  the  period  of  the  prophecy  is  to  have 
its  course  ;   but   taking  the  most    favourable    term,   and  the 
one  generally   accepted,  the   edict  would   be  that  issued   by 
Arataxerxes  in   the  twentieth  year  of  his   reign  (Neh.  ii.  1), 
which  is  said  to   have  been  in  B.C.  445.     This   brings   us  to 
A.D.  45  for  the  fulfilment  of  all  expressed   in  the   prophecy. 
In  that  year,  then,  the  history  of  the  Jews  should  have  been 
wound  up  in  blessing.      It  was  a  prophecy  affecting  both  the 
"people"   and  their  ''holy  city."      Their  period  of  trial  was 
to  be   concluded,  there  was   to  be  "  an  end  "  of  their  "  sins," 
their  "  reconciliation  "  to  God  was  to  be  perfected  ;  the  most 
Holy,  whatever  that  may  mean,  was   to  be  anointed,  and  the 
nation  were  to  be  regenerated,  and   accepted  in   "  everlasting 
righteousness."     But  the  events  have  been  woefully  at  variance 
with  the  prophecy.      The  Jews,  about  this  time,  are  considered 
to   have   steeped  themselves  in   the   guilt  of  compassing  the 
death  of  their  Messiah,  and  to   have  incurred  the  outpouring 
of  the  last  dregs  of  God's  wrath   against  the  nation.      There  is 
no   occurrence   to    distinguish    the   year   in  question,    but    in 
A.D.  70  the  city  of  Jerusalem  was  demolished,  and  the  Jews 
underwent  that  dispersion  which  has  been  maintained  to  the 
present  day.     They  are  yet  in  their  sins,  and  the  happy  time 
of  entire    reconciliation   spoken  of   by   the   prophet    remains 
unrealised. 
Dispersion         (8).  The  predicted  dispersion  and  restoration  of  the  Jews, 
^to  of"     coupled  with  their  remaining  a  peculiar  people,  though  scattered 
the  Jews,     among  all  nations,  are  held  to  present  standing  tokens  of  the 


PROPHECY. 


197 


reality  of  prophecy.  But  the  supposition  will  not  stand  the 
test  of  examination.  All  the  early  prophecies  of  this  descrip- 
tion, and  these  embrace  whatever  there  is  that  is  specific  in 
its  nature  connected  with  the  subject,  relate  to  the  visitations 
culminating  in  the  captivity  in  Babylon,  and  are  given  by 
writers  conscious  of  this  event.  They  saw  thus  far,  but  no 
further.  They  had  no  knowledge  of  the  ultimate  dispersion 
now  prevailing.  They  mark  the  sin  that  led  to  the  captivity, 
which  was  the  sin  of  idolatry,  and  represent  the  people  as  held 
fast  in  this  particular  transgression  throughout  the  period  of 
their  judgment.  "  When  thou  shalt  beget  children  and  chil- 
dren's children,  8.nd  ye  shall  have  remained  long  in  the  land, 
and  shall  corrupt  yourselves,  and  make  a  graven  image,  or  the 
likeness  of  any  thing,  and  shall  do  evil  in  the  sight  of  the 
Lord  thy  God,  to  provoke  him  to  anger :  I  call  heaven  and 
earth  to  witness  against  you  this  day,  that  ye  shall  soon  utterly 
perish  from  off  the  land  whereunto  ye  go  over  Jordan  to  pos- 
sess it ;  ye  shall  not  prolong  your  days  upon  it,  but  shall 
utterly  be  destroyed.  And  the  Lord  shall  scatter  you  among 
the  nations,  and  ye  shall  be  left  few  in  number  among  the 
heathen,  whither  the  Lord  shall  lead  you.  And  there  ye  shall 
serve  gods,  the  work  of  man's  hands,  wood  and  stone,  which 
neither  see,  nor  hear,  nor  eat,  nor  smell"  (Deut.  iv.  25-28). 
"  But  it  shall  come  to  pass,  if  thou  wilt  not  hearken  unto  the 
voice  of  the  Lord  thy  God,  to  observe  to  do  all  his  command- 
ments and  his  statutes  which  I  command  thee  this  day  ;  that 
all  these  curses  shall  come  upon  thee,  and  overtake  thee. — 
The  Lord  shall  bring  thee,  and  thy  king  which  thou  shalt  set 
over  thee,  unto  a  nation  which  neither  thou  nor  thy  fathers 
have  known  ;  and  there  shalt  thou  serve  other  gods,  wood  and 
stone. — And  the  Lord  shall  scatter  thee  among  all  people, 
from  the  one  end  of  the  earth  even  unto  the  other  ;  and  there 
thou  shalt  serve  other  gods,  which  neither  thou  nor  thy  fathers 
have  known,  even  wood  and  stone  "  (Deut.  xxviii.  15,  36,  64). 
*'  Even  all  nations  shall  say.  Wherefore  hath  the  Lord  done 
thus  unto  this  land  ?  what  meaneth  the  heat  of  this  great 
anger  ?  Then  men  shall  say.  Because  they  have  forsaken  the 
covenant  of  the  Lord  God  of  their  fathers,  which  he  made  with 
them  when  he  brought  them  forth  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt ; 
and  they  went  and  served  other  gods,  and  worshipped  them, 


198 


PROPHECY. 


gods  whom  they  knew  not,  and  whom  he  had  not  given  unta 
them  ;  and  the  anger  of  the  Lord  was  kindled  against  thit 
land,  to  bring  upon  it  all  the  curses  that  are  written  in  thi» 
book  ;  and  the  Lord  rooted  them  out  of  their  land  in  anger, 
and  in  wrath,  and  in  great  indignation,  and  cast  them  intc- 
another  land,  as  it  is  this  day"  (Deut.  xxix.  24-28).  "Bui 
if  thine  heart  turn  away,  so  that  thou  wilt  not  hear,  but  shall 
be  drawn  away,  and  worship  other  gods,  and  serve  them  ;  1 
denounce  unto  you  this  day,  that  ye  shall  surely  perish,  and 
that  ye  shall  not  prolong  your  days  upon  the  land,  whither 
thou  passest  over  Jordan  to  go  to  possess  it "  (Deut.  xxx. 
17,  18).  Jeremiah,  who  prophesied  specifically  of  the  cap- 
tivity in  Babylon,  puts  the  matter  on  the  same  footing. 
"  And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  when  thou  shalt  show  this  people 
all  these  words,  and  they  shall  say  unto  thee.  Wherefore  hath 
the  Lord  pronounced  all  this  great  evil  against  us  ?  or  what  is 
our  iniquity  ?  or  what  is  our  sin  that  we  have  committed 
against  the  Lord  our  God  ?  Then  shalt  thou  say  unto  them, 
Because  your  fathers  have  forsaken  me,  saith  the  Lord,  and 
have  walked  after  other  gods,  and  have  served  them,  and  have 
worshipped  them  : — therefore  will  I  cast  you  out  of  this  land 
into  a  land  that  ye  know  not,  neither  you  nor  your  fathers  ; 
and  there  shall  ye  serve  other  gods  day  and  night,  where  I 
will  not  show  you  favour"  (Jer.  xvi.  10-13).  "And  many 
nations  shall  pass  by  this  city,  and  they  shall  say  every  man 
to  his  neighbour.  Wherefore  hath  the  Lord  done  thus  unto 
this  great  city  ?  Then  they  shall  answer.  Because  they  have 
forsaken  the  covenant  of  the  Lord  their  God,  and  worshipped 
other  gods,  and  served  them "  (Jer.  xxii.  8,  9).  And  there 
is  the  crowning  enunciation  in  Jer.  xxxii.  32-44.  Then, 
again,  idolatry  is  the  cause  of  offence,  and  the  "  king  of 
Babylon"  the  instrument  of  the  judgment,  after  which  comes 
a  restoration  to  be  perpetuated  in  the  thorough  conversion  of 
the  people  and  their  never  ending  prosperity.  "  Behold,  I 
will  gather  them  out  of  all  countries,  whither  I  have  driven 
them,  in  mine  anger,  and  in  my  fury,  and  in  great  wrath  ;  and 
I  will  bring  them  again  unto  this  place,  and  I  will  cause  them 
to  dwell  safely ;  and  they  shall  be  my  people,  and  I  will  be 
their  God  :  and  I  will  give  them  one  heart,  and  one  way,  that 
they  may  fear  me  for  ever,  for  the  good  of  them,  and  of  their 


1 


PROPHECY. 


199 


children  after  them  :  and  I  will  make  an  everlasting  covenant 
with  them,  that  I  will  not  turn  away  from  them  to  do  them 
good  ;  but  I  will  put  my  fear  in  their  hearts,  that  they  shall 
not  depart  from  me.      Yea,  I  will  rejoice  over  them  to  do  them 
good,  and  I  will  plant  them  in  this  land  assuredly  with  my 
whole  heart  and  with  my  whole  soul."     And  so  also  Ezekiel 
(xxxvi.  17-28;   xxxvii.  21-23),  who  was  himself  of  the  cap- 
tivity.     He  declares  that  it  was  "  for  the  blood  that  they  had 
shed  upon  the  land,  and  for  their  idols  wherewith  they  had 
polluted  it,"  that  God  had  "scattered  them  among  the  heathen," 
and   "dispersed"  them  "through  the  countries;"    but  that 
they  should  be  restored,   a  converted   people,  in  everlasting 
blessing.      "  I  will  take  you  from  among  the  heathen,   and 
gather  you  out  of  all  countries,  and  will   bring  you  into  your 
own  land.      Then  will  I  sprinkle  clean  water  upon  you,  and 
ye  shall  be  clean  ;  from  all  your  filthiness,  and  from  all  your 
idols,  will  I  cleanse  you.      A  new  heart  also  will  I  give  you, 
and  a  new  spirit  will  I  put  within  you  ;   and  I  will  take  away 
the  stony  heart  out  of  your  flesh,  and  I  will  give  you  an  heart 
of  flesh.      And  I  will  put  my  spirit  within  you,  and  cause  you 
to  walk  in  my  statutes,  and  ye  shall  keep  my  judgments,  and 
do  them.      And  ye  shall  dwell  in  the  land  that  I  gave  to  your 
fathers ;   and  ye  shall  be  my  people,  and  I  will  be  your  God." 
"  Behold,  I  will  take  the  children  of  Israel  from  among  the 
heathen,  whither    they    be    gone,   and  will  gather  them   on 
every  side,  and  bring  them  into  their  own  land  :  and  I  will 
make  them  one  nation  in  the  land  upon   the  mountains  of 
Israel,  and  one  king  shall  be  king  to  them  all ;  and  they  shall 
be  no  more  two  nations,  neither  shall  they  be  divided   into 
two  kingdoms  any  more  at  all;  neither  shall  they  defile  them- 
selves any  more  with  their  idols,  nor  with  their  detestable 
things,  nor  with  any  of  their  transgressions  ;  but  I  will  save 
them  out  of  all  their  dwelling-places  wherein  they  have  sinned 
and  will  cleanse  them  ;  so  shall  they  be  my  people,  and  I  will 
be  their  God.     And  David  my  servant  shall  be  king  over  them, 
and  they  shall  all  have  one  shepherd  ;  they  shall  also  walk 
in  my  judgments  and  observe  my  statutes,  and  do  them.     And 
they  shall  dwell  in  the  land  that  I  have  given  unto  Jacob  my 
servant,    wherein  your    fathers  have  dwelt;    and    they  shall 
dwell  therein,  even  they,  and  their  children,  and  their  chil- 


200 


PROPHECY. 


dren's  children,  for  ever ;  and  my  servant  David  shall  be  their 
prince  for  ever.  Moreover,  I  will  make  a  covenant  of  peace 
with  them  ;  it  shall  be  an  everlasting  covenant  with  them  : 
and  I  will  place  them,  and  multiply  them,  and  will  set  my 
sanctuary  in  the  midst  of  them  for  evermore.  My  tabernacle 
also  shall  be  with  them  ;  yea,  I  will  be  their  God,  and  they 
shall  be  my  people.'* 

These  prophets,  conscious  of  the  idolatry,  the  captivity,  and 
the  dispersion,  could  put  these  circumstances  together.  Be- 
yond this  they  knew  no  more ;  and,  launching  into  futurity, 
involved  themselves  in  predictions  that  have  not  been  realised. 
The  Jews,  since  the  captivity,  now  for  two  thousand  four 
hundred  years,  whatever  their  sins,  have  assuredly  been  free 
from  that  of  the  worship  of  idols.  But  their  restoration  has  not 
been  effected  with  the  blessings  spiritual  and  temporal  pro- 
mised them.  They  never  regained  their  original  standing  in 
independent  nationality,  nor  have  their  hearts,  as  we  are 
assured,  been  turned  to  God.  Instead  of  renovating  them 
spiritually,  God,  we  are  told,  "  hath  concluded  them  all  in 
unbelief"  (Rom.  xi.  32).  Nor  has  the  prince  representing 
David,  with  whom  was  to  be  established  the  "  everlasting 
covenant,"  and  who  was  to  rule  over  them  in  peace  for  ever, 
made  his  appearence.  Daniel,  writing,  as  it  may  be  judged, 
long  after  the  termination  of  the  captivity  in  the  times  of  the 
Grecian  rule,  recast  the  subject  by  projecting  a  fresh  prophecy, 
embracing  the,  to  him,  safe  period  of  nearly  five  centuries,  at 
the  end  of  which  was  to  come  in  the  expected  prince  and  the 
reign  of  righteousness  ;  but  this  term  has  also  ended  in  dis- 
appointment. And  so  we  are  brought  to  the  view  of  the 
apostle,  who,  still  holding  out  the  banner  of  hope,  calls  upon 
us  to  praise  God's  wondrous  ways  in  working  out  these  happy 
delineations.  "  0  the  depth,"  he  exclaims,  ''  of  the  riches 
both  of  the  wisdom  and  knowledge  of  God  !  how  unsearchable 
are  his  judgments,  and  his  ways  past  finding  out "  (Rom.  xi. 
33).  We  may  respond  cordially  to  the  sentiment,  however 
little  we  may  be  able  to  subscribe  to  its  application. 

Failing  thus  the  specific  predictions  of  the  Deuteronomist, 
and  of  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  and  Daniel,  we  are  cast,  for  the 
renovation  of  Israel,  upon  a  vague  and  limitless  futurity.  The 
Jews  are  themselves  conscious    that    every  beacon    of   hope 


' 


PROPHECY. 


201 


hitherto  presented  to  them  as  a  people  awaiting  recognition,  has 
proved  unreal,  and  with  not  one  promise  uttered  by  their  pro- 
phets, connected  with  their  past  history,  fulfilled,  the  expecta- 
tions maintained  for  them  for  the  future  are  entitled  to  small 
consideration.  The  existing  condition  of  the  Jews,  remaining 
a  marked  people,  unabsorbed  into  the  masses  surrounding  them, 
may  be  accounted  for  without  a  miracle.  Their  strong  sense  of 
nationality,  their  firmness  in  their  religious  persuasions,  their 
distinctive  usages,  their  intermarriages,  and  their  seclusion  from 
other  races,  and  exclusion  by  them,  are  sufficient  causes  to  have 
preserved  them  in  their  identity.  The  national  peculiarities  of 
members  of  the  same  empire  remain  distinct,  without  the  repell- 
ing conditions  belonging  to  the  Jews.  Witness  the  well  marked 
characteristics  of  the  English,  Scotch,  and  Irish.  Among  the 
wandering  and  dispersed  tribes  the  Gypsies  present  features 
quite  as  remarkable  for  non -absorption  as  do  the  Jews,  and  for 
as  lengthened  a  space  of  time.  The  Parsees  have  no  land  of 
their  own,  and  are  scattered  over  the  East,  and  yet  continue  a 
distinct  people.  And  the  negroes  of  Africa  have  been  equally 
dispersed,  and,  nevertheless,  have  maintained  their  peculiarities 
wherever  they  have  gone. 

(9.)  Micah  prophesied  a  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  "  Zion,"  ^^^^*'^°- 
he  said,  shall  "  be  ploughed  as  afield,  and  Jerusalem  shall  be-  Jerusalem 
come  heaps,  and  the  mountain  of  the  house  as  the  high  places 
of  the  forest"  (iii.  12).  But  the  calamity,  we  are  told,  was 
averted  by  repentance.  Jeremiah  recites  the  prophecy  as  that 
given  out  publicly  by  "  Micah  the  Morasthite,  to  all  the  people 
of  Judah,"  and  adds,  that  Judah  "  besought  the  Lord,  and  the 
Lord  repented  him  of  the  evil  which  he  had  pronounced  against 
them  "  (Jer.  xxvi.  18,  19).  The  case  is  the  same  as  in  the 
instance  of  Jonah, — a  divine  commission  given  to  an  appointed 
prophet,  and  then  falsified.  Any  one  might  prophecy  on  any 
subject  on  these  terms. 

(10.)  "  Within  three  score  and  five  years  shall  Ephraim  be  Captivity 
broken,  that  it  be  not  a  people"  (Isa.  vii.  8).  By  Ephraim  is  J^nSs/^^ 
meant  the  schismatic  ten  tribes  forming  the  kingdom  of  Israel 
as  distinguished  from  Judah,  their  land  becoming  known  as 
Samaria.  This  prediction  is  supposed  to  have  been  put  forth 
in  the  year  B.C.  742,  but  as  Isaiah  was  not  edited  until  after 
the  return  from  the  captivity  in  Babylon,  no  reliance  can  be 


mmmmmmmmm 


The  end  of 
Jeroboam. 


The  fate  of 
Josiah  and 
Jehoiakim. 


202 


PROPHECY. 


placed  on  the  dates  or  integrity  of  the  announcements  appearing 
in  his  name.  Still,  taking  the  time  ascribed  as  the  right  time, 
the  event  predicted  came  off,  not  in  sixty-five  years,  but  much 
sooner,  namely  in  twenty-one.  "  In  the  ninth  year  of  Hosea, 
tlie  king  of  Assyria  took  Samaria,  and  carried  Israel  away  into 
Assyria. — There  was  none  left  but  the  tribe  of  Judah  only" 
(2  Kings  xvii.  6,  18).  This  is  stated  to  have  been  in  B.C.  721. 
(11.)  Amos,  who  prophesied  in  the  days  of  Jeroboam,  ha- 
zarded the  prediction  that  this  godless  sovereign  should  ''die 
by  the  sword"  (vii.  11).  But  the  fact  turned  out  otherwise, 
and  he  ended  his  days  naturally,  sleeping  ''with  his  fathers  " 

(2  Kings  xiv.  29). 

(12.)  There  are  the  like  failures  in  respect  of  Josiah  and  his 
son  Jehoiakim.  Josiah,  in  compensation  for  his  godly  reforms, 
instituted  on  the  discovery  of  the  book  of  the  law  by  Hilkiah, 
was  assured  of  a  peaceable  end.  "  Behold  therefore,"  he  was 
told,  "  I  will  gather  thee  unto  thy  fathers,  and  thou  shalt  be 
gathered  into  thy  grave  in  peace  ;  and  thine  eyes  shall  not  see 
all  the  evil  which  I  will  bring  upon  this  place"  (2  Kings  xxii. 
20).  But  we  learn,  strangely  enough  a  little  further  on  in  the 
same  record,  that  "  In  his  days  Pharaoh -nechoh  king  of  Egypt 
went  up  against  the  king  of  Assyria  to  the  river  Euphrates  : 
and  King  Josiah  went  against  him  ;  and  he  slew  him  at  Me- 
giddo,  when  he  had  seen  him.  And  his  servants  carried  him 
in  a  chariot  dead  from  Megiddo,  and  brought  him  to  Jerusalem, 
and  buried  him  in  his  own  sepulchre"  (2  Kings  xxiii.  29,  30). 
The  chronicler,  perhaps  to  mend  the  matter,  says  he  was  car- 
ried alive  into  Jenisalem,  and  there  died  of  his  wounds  (2  Chron. 
XXXV.  23,  24).  Josiah's  son  was  of  a  different  stamp  from  his 
father,  being  a.s  remarkable  for  his  iniquities  as  the  other  was 
for  his  godliness.  A  fate  corresponding  with  his  deserts  was 
accordingly  marked  out  for  him.  "  Therefore  thus  saith  the  Lord 
concerning  Jehoiakim  the  son  of  Josiah  the  king  of  Judah.  They 
shall  not  lament  for  him,  saying.  Ah  my  brother !  or.  Ah  my  sister! 
they  shall  not  lament  for  him,  saying.  Ah  lord  !  or,  Ah  his  glory  ! 
He  shall  be  buried  with  the  burial  of  an  ass,  drawn  and  cast 
forth  beyond  the  gates  of  Jerusalem."  "  Therefore  thus  saith 
the  Lord  of  Jehoiakim,  king  of  Judah;  he  shall  have  none  to  sit 
upon  the  throne  of  David  :  and  his  dead  body  shall  be  cast  out 
in  the  day  to  the  heat,  and  in  the  night  to  the  frost"   (Jer. 


\ 


PROPHECY. 


203  ^ 


xxii.  18,  19  ;  xxxvi.  30).  So  far  the  prophet.  And  thus  the 
historian.  "  Now  the  rest  of  the  acts  of  Jehoiakim,  and  all 
that  he  did,  are  they  not  written  in  the  book  of  the  Chronicles 
of  the  kings  of  Judah  ?  So  Jehoiakim  slept  with  his  fathers  : 
and  Jehoiachin  his  son  reigned  in  his  stead  "  (2  Kings  xxiv.  6). 

It  is  remarkable  that  while  God  is  represented  to  have  re-  Iff^^^ 
vealed  himself  as  the  one  true  God  to  the  Jews  only,  taking  nations, 
them  alone  up  as  his  people,  and  centring  his  worship  among 
them  in  their  "  holy  city,"  to  the  exclusion  of  all  worship  else- 
where,  the  Gentiles  being  abandoned   without   testimony  or 
guidance  to  their  idolatries,  he  should,  nevertheless,  according 
to  the  prophets,  visit  these  Gentile  nations  with  various  judg- 
ments, as  if  absolute  transgressors  against  his  known  will  and 
commandments.       One  would  have  thought,  that,  if  viewed  as 
unfitted  for  instruction  or  recognition,  they  would  equally  have 
been  ignored  for  special  correction.  The  only  exceptional  instance 
is  that  of  Jonah's  alleged  mission  to  Nineveh.      Here  there  is 
said  to  have  been  a  call  to  repentance  made  in  the  name  of 
God,  and  which  was  at  once  responded  to.     But  what  was  the 
nature  of  the  repentance  ?     Did  the  Ninevites  abandon  their 
idols  and  turn  to  the  true  God,— that  God  who  was  to  be  wor- 
shipped only  in  Jerusalem  ?      The  whole  tale  appears  as  apo- 
cryphal as  its  introductory  feature  of  the  whale.     It  is,  more- 
over, remarkable  that  the  nations  denounced  by  the  spirit  of 
God  through  the  mouths  of  these  prophets,  are  precisely  those, 
and  those  only,  immediately  surrounding  the  Jews,  and  known 
to  them  naturally  in  the  flesh.    Immense  fields  of  populations,  of 
a  like  order,  steeped  in  idolatry,  and  given  over  t^  wicked  courses, 
were  spread  about  in  outer  and  remoter  circles  ;  but  the  pro- 
phetic afflatus  had  no  power  to  reach  them.      The  divine  cog- 
nisance and  action  are  restricted  to  the  limits  of  the  knowledge 
of  the  human  agents.    Would  it  be  unfair  to  conclude  that  the 
mission  itself  had  no  higher  origin  than  the  human  sentiment  ? 
The  examination  of  these  prophecies  in  their  details  certainly 
leads  to  the  same  judgment. 

I  proceed  to  notice  the  most  tangible  of  this  class  of  prophecy. 

(13.)   "The  Egyptians  will  I  give  over  into  the  hand  of  a  Egypt, 
cruel  lord  ;  and  a  fierce  king  shall  rule  over  them,  saith  the 
Lord  of  hosts"  (Isa.  xix.  4).      "So  shall  the  king  of  Assyria 
lead  away  the  Egyptians  prisoners"  (Isa.  xx.  4.V      "  The  Lord 


204 


PROPHECY. 


of  hosts,  the  God  of  Israel,"  (no  God  to  the  Egyptians,  be  it 
observed,)  "  saith,  Behold  I  will  punish  the  multitude  of  No, 
and  Pharaoh,  and  Egypt,  with  their  gods,  and  their  kings  ; 
even  Pharaoh,  and  all  them  that  trust  in  him  :  and  I  will  deliver 
them  into  the  hands  of  those  that  seek  their  lives,  and  into 
the  hand  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  king  of  Babylon"  (Jer.  xlvi.  25, 
26,  ;  see  also  Ezek.  xxix.  19).  There  is  no  security  that  the 
denunciations  were  not  recorded  after  the  events. 

"  No  foot  of  man  shall  pass  through  it,  nor  foot  of  beast 
shall  pass  through  it,  neither  shall  it  be  inhabited  forty  years. — 
Yet  thus  saith  the  Lord  God  :  At  the  end  of  forty  years  will 
I  gather  the  Egyptians  from  the  people  whither  they  were 
scattered  :  and  I  will  bring  again  the  captivity  of  Egypt"  (Ezek. 
xxix.  11-13).  This  is  sufficiently  precise.  The  period  is  a 
round  and  sacred  number.  Unfortunately  there  is  no  record 
of  the  fulfilment. 

"  And  they  shall  be — -a  base  kingdom.  It  shall  be  the 
basest  of  the  kingdoms"  (Ezek.  xxix.  14,  15).  It  became,  and 
long  continued,  the  centre  of  learning.  It  is  now  the  seat  of 
the  most  enlightened  government  existing  among  the  oriental 
races,  an  important  emporium  of  commerce,  and  the  highway 
between  Europe  and  Asia. 

"  And  the  waters  shall  fail  from  the  sea,  and  the  river  shall 
be  wasted  and  dried  up.  And  they  shall  turn  the  rivers  far 
away"  (Isa.  xix.  5,  6).  "And  I  will  make  the  rivers  dry" 
(Ezek.  XXX.  12).  These  predictions  relate  to  invasions,  first 
by  the  king  of  Assyria,  and  subsequently  by  the  king  of  Babylon, 
but  the  desiccation  foretold  was  never  effectuated. 

"  In  that  day  shall  there  be  an  altar  to  the  Lord  in  the 
midst  of  the  land  of  Egypt. — For  they  shall  cry  unto  the  Lord 
because  of  the  oppressors,  and  he  shall  send  them  a  saviour, 
and  a  great  one,  and  he  shall  deliver  them.  And  the  Lord 
shall  be  known  to  Egypt,  and  the  Egyptians  shall  know  the 
Lord. in  that  day,  and  shaU  do'  sacrifice  and  oblation;  yea,  they 
shall  vow  a  vow  unto  the  Lord,  and  perform  it.  And  the  Lord 
shall  smite  Egypt :  he  shall  smite  and  heal  it :  and  they  shall 
return  even  to  the  Lord,  and  he  shall  be  entreated  of  them, 
and  shall  heal  them. — In  that  day  shall  Israel  be  the  third 
with  Egypt  and  with  Assyria,  even  a  blessing  in  the  midst  of 
the  land :  whom  the  Lord  of  hosts  shall  keep,  saying.  Blessed 


PROPHFX'Y. 


205 


be  Egypt  my  people,  and  Israel  mine  inheritance"  (Isa.  xix. 
19-25).  This  relates  to  the  last  times  when  Israel  are  to  be 
restored,  and  being  prophetic  of  the  future,  I  should  not  have 
noticed  the  passage,  but  that  in  Joel  the  description  of  Egypt's 
position  in  these  times  is  altogether  different.  "  Egypt  shall 
be  a  desolation,  and  Edom  shall  be  a  desolate  wilderness,  for 
the  violence  against  the  children  of  Judah,  because  they  have 
shed  innocent  blood  in  their  land.  But  Judah  shall  dwell 
for  ever,  and  Jerusalem  from  generation  to  generation.  For  I 
will  cleanse  their  blood  that  I  have  not  cleansed  :  for  the  Lord 
dwelleth  in  Zion"  (Joel  iii.  19-21).  With  Isaiah,  Egypt  is 
healed,  accepted  as  of  the  people  of  God,  and  brought  with 
Israel  into  common  blessing.  With  Joel,  Israel  is  cleansed, 
but  Egypt  treated  as  an  adversary,  and  left  to  suffer  judgment. 

(14^).    Egypt  lies  to   the   south  of  Judea.     Following  the  Edom. 
geographical   order,    the  next  land  which   has   attracted  the 
notfce  of  the  prophets  is  Edom.      In  Joel,  as  above  shown,  the 
two  countries  are  associated  together  in  final  judgment.    In  the 
present  day  they  stand  very  differently  circumstanced.     Wliile 
Egypt  is  flourishing,  and  making  progress  in  prosperity,  Edom 
is°so  desolate  that,  the  prophecy  against  her  might  be  con- 
sidered   completed,    but    for  further    particulars    of   her   fate 
appearing  in  other  predictions,     "  Edom  shall  be  a  desolation: 
every  one  that  goeth  by  it  shall  be  astonished,  and  shall  hiss 
at  all  the  plagues  thereof.      As  in  the  overthrow  of  Sodom  and 
Gomorrah,  and  the  neighbour  cities  thereof,  saith  the  Lord,  no 
man  shall  abide  there,  neither  shall  a  son  of  man  dwell  in  it " 
(Jer.  xlix.  17,  18).     "The   Lord  hath  a  sacrifice  in  Bozrah, 
and  a  great  slaughter  in  the  land  of  Idumea.      For  it  is  the 
day  of  the  Lord's  vengeance,  and  the  year  of  recompences  for 
the  controversy  of  Zion.     And  the  streams  thereof  shall  be 
turned  into  pitch,  and  the  dust  thereof  into  brimstone,  and  the 
land    thereof  shall   become    burning  pitch.      It  shall  not  be 
quenched  night  nor  day ;  the  smoke  thereof  shall  go  up  for 
ever :  from  generation  to  generation  it  shall  lie  waste  ;  none 
shall  pass  through   it  for  ever  and  ever"  (Isa.  xxxiv.  6-10). 
Edom  should  be  repopulated  to  admit  of  the  crowning  slaughter 
here  spoken  of.      After  the  long  disconnection  with  the  Jews, 
Edom,  on  the  one  side,  nearly  denuded  of  inhabitants,  and  the 
Jews, 'on  the  other,  dispersed  for  ages  among  distant  nations, 


206 


PROPHECY. 


PROPHECY. 


207 


how  this  still  pending  slaughter  is  to  be  associated  with  a 
*'  controversy  for  Zion,"  it  is  hard  to  imagine.  The  conflagra- 
tion spoken  of  is  equally  in  the  future,  and  as  difficult  to 
realize.  It  is  that  of  a  whole  land,  overspread  with  pitch  and 
brimstone,  blazing  like  Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  and  burning  for 


ever. 


Moab.  (1*5)-   We  pass  now  to  Moab.      If  it  is  a  matter  of  surprise 

that  God,  while  neglecting  the  Gentile  nations  for  good, 
should  visit  them,  nevertheless,  for  judgment,  it  is  equally 
strange  that  he  should  inspire  and  commission  a  man  of  one  of 
these  outcast  nations  to  utter  prophetic  communications  in  his 
name.  Yet  so  it  was.  We  have  the  prophecy  of  Balaam,  the 
Moabite,  concerning  the  chosen  race  and  his  own  people.  *'  I 
shall  see  him,  but  not  now:  I  shall  behold  him,  but  not  nigh  : 
there  shall  come  a  star  out  of  Jacob,  and  a  sceptre  shall  rise 
out  of  Israel,  and  shall  smite  the  corners  of  Moab,  and  destroy 
all  the  children  of  Sheth"  (Num.  xxiv.  17).  This  was  real- 
ized by  king  David,  and  points  to  a  cruel  butchery  committed 
by  him.  "And  he  smote  Moab,  and  measured  them  with  a 
line,  casting  them  down  to  the  ground  ;  even  with  two  lines 
measured  he  to  put  to  death,  and  with  one  full  line  to  keep 
alive.  And  so  the  Moabites  became  David's  servants"  (2  Sam. 
viii.  2).  The  record  having  been  made  up  after  the  event, 
this  cannot  be  accepted  as  a  prophetic  denunciation. 

Isaiah  gives  us  "  The  burden  of  Moab."  He  appears  to 
have  taken  his  materials  from  an  older  prophet,  at  the  close  of 
whose  denunciations  he  says,  ''This  is  the  word  that  the  Lord 
hath  spoken  concerning  Moab  since  that  time.  But  now,"  he 
adds,  contrastedly,  "  the  Lord  hath  spoken,  saying,  within  three, 
years,  as  the  years  of  an  hireling,  and  the  glory  of  Moab  shall 
be  contemned,  with  all  that  great  multitude  ;  and  the  remnant 
shall  be  very  small  and  feeble"  (Isa.  xvi.  13,  14).  Tlie  old 
prophecy  had  not  taken  effect,  but  now  the  judgment  was  to 
be  carried  out  in  three  years.  This  is  said  to  have  been  an- 
nounced in  B.C.  726.  But,  according  to  Jeremiah,  who  is  con- 
sidered to  have  written  a  century  and  a  quarter  later,  in  B.C. 
600,  the  sentence  remained  still  unexecuted  in  his  time. 
"  Moab,"  he  says,  "  hath  been  at  ease  from  his  youth,  and  he 
hath  settled  on  his  lees,  and  hath  not  been  emptied  from 
vessel  to  vessel,  neither  hath  he  gone  into  captivity :  therefore 


his   taste   remained   in  him,  and  his  scent  is  not  changed" 

(Jer.  xlviii.  11).      And  then  we  find  him  repeating  the  pro-  Pia^arisms 

phecy  put  forward  by  Isaiah,  as  if  an  independent  utterance  of  miak. 

his  own,  care,  however,  being  taken  not  to  adopt  the  awkward 

limit  of  three  years,  by  which  the  earlier  prophecy  had  gone 

wrong.      I  give  the  parallel  passages  which  show  the  identity 

of  these  prophecies. 

Isaiah.  Jeremiah. 

XV.  2.  On  all  their  heads  xlviii.  37.  For  every  head 
shall  be-  baldness,  and  every  shall  be  bald,  and  every  beard 
beard  cut  off.  clipped. 

3.     In    their    streets    they        38.  There  shall  be  lamenta- 
shall     gird     themselves     with  tion    generally    upon    all    the 
sackcloth  ;  on  the  tops  of  their  housetops  of  Moab,  and  in  the 
houses,    and    in    their   streets,   streets  thereof, 
every  one  shall  howl,  weeping 
abundantly. 

4  And  Heshbon  shall  cry,  34.  From  the  cry  of  Hesh- 
and  Elealeh  :  their  voice  shall  bon  even  unto  Elealeh,  and 
be  heard  even  unto  Jahaz.  even  unto  Jahaz. 

5.  My  heart  shall  cry  out  31.  Therefore  will  I  howl 
for  Moab.  for   Moab,  and  1  will  cry  out 

for  all  Moab  ;  mine  heart  shall 

mourn    for    the  men   of    Kir- 

heres. 

5.    His   fugitives   shall    flee        34.   From   Zoar   even   unto 

unto   Zoar,  an  heifer  of  three  Horonaim,  as  an  heifer  of  three 

years  old  :  years  old. 

5.  For  by  the  mounting  up  5.  For  in  the  going  up  of 
of  Luhith  with  weeping  shall  Luhith  continual  weeping  shall 
they  go  it  up  ;  for  in  the  way  go  up  ;  for  in  the  going  down 
of  Horonaim  they  shall  raise  up  of  Horonaim  the  enemies  have 
a  cry  of  destruction.  heard  a  cry  of  destruction. 

6.  For  the  waters  of  Nim-  34.  For  the  waters  also  of 
rim  shall  be  desolate.  Nimrim  shall  be  desolate. 

xvi.  6.  We  have  heard  of  the  29,  30.  We  have  heard  the 
pride  of  Moab  ;  he  is  very  pride  of  Moab,  (he  is  exceed- 
proud  :  even  of  his  haughti-  ing  proud)  his  loftiness  and  his 
ness,   and  his   pride,    and   his  pride,  and  the  haughtiness  of 


208 


PROPnECY. 


PROPHECY. 


209 


wrath  :  but  his  lies  shall  not 
be  so. 

7.  Therefore  shall  Moab 
howl  for  Moab,  every  one  shall 
howl. 

8,  9.  For  the  fields  of 
Heshbon  languish,  and  the 
vine  of  Sibmah  :  the  lords  of 
the  heathen  have  broken  down 
the  principal  plants'  thereof, 
they  are  come  even  unto  Jazer, 
they  wandered  through  the 
wilderness ;  her  branches  are 
stretched  out,  they  are  gone 
over  the  sea.  Therefore  I  will 
bewail  with  the  weeping  of 
Jazer  the  vine  of  Sibmah : — for 
the  shouting  for  thy  summer 
fruits  and  for  thy  harvest  is 
fallen. 

10.  And  gladness  is  taken 
away,  and  joy  out  of  the  plen- 
tiful field ;  and  in  the  vine- 
yards there  shall  be  no  singing, 
neither  shall  there  be  shoutinfj: 
the  treaders  shall  tread  out  no 
wine  in  their  presses  ;  I  have 
made  their  vintaofe  shoutinoj  to 
cease. 

11.  Wherefore  my  bowels 
shall  sound  like  an  harp  for 
Moab,  and  hiine  inward  parts 
for  Kir-haresh. 

12.  And  it  shall  come  to 
pass,  when  it  is  seen  that 
Moab  is  weary  on  the  high 
place,  that  he  shall  come  to 
his  sanctuary  to  pray  ;  but  he 
shall  not  prevail. 


his  heart. — His  lies  shall  not 
so  effect  it. 

20.  Howl  and  cry  ;  tell  ye 
in  Arnon,  that  Moab  is  spoiled. 

32.  0  vine  of  Sibmah,  I 
will  weep  for  thee  with  the 
weeping  of  Jazer :  thy  plants 
are  gone  over  the  sea,  they 
reach  even  to  the  sea  of  Jazer: 
the  spoiler  is  fallen  upon  thy 
summer  fruits  and  upon  thy 
vintage. 


33.  And  joy  and  gladness  is 
taken  from  the  plentiful  field, 
and  from  the  land  of  Moab  ; 
and  I  have  caused  wine  to  fail 
from  the  wine-presses :  none 
shall  tread  with  shouting;  their 
shoutinoj  shall  be  no  shoutinsr. 


36.  Therefore  mine  heart 
shall  sound  for  Moab  like  pipes, 
and  mine  heart  shall  sound  like 
pipes  for  the  men  of  Kir-heres. 

13.  And  Moab  shall  be 
ashamed  of  Chemosh  (their 
idol),  as  the  house  of  Israel 
was  ashamed  of  Bethel  their 
confidence. 


Jeremiah  is  thus  found  to  be  another  of  those   prophets 
whose  writings  are  manifestly  imreliable.      Professing  to  derive 
his    materials   from  independent  inspiration,   be    is    detected 
taking  his  flights  on  borrowed  pinions.     Nor  does  he  acknow- 
ledge his  obligations,  but  veils  them  by  transpositions,  altera- 
tion of  language,  and  introduction  of  fresh  matter.      This  is 
not  a  solitary  instance  of  his  appropriation  of  the  thoughts  of 
others.       "  Jeremiah,"    observes    Dr    Davidson,    "  has    made 
copious  use   of   prior  prophecies;"  in  evidence  of  which  he 
points  to  numerous  passages,  from  which  I  select  those  where 
the  correspondences  are  most  evident.      Compare  1.  8  &c.  with 
Isa.  xlviii.  20  ;  1,  28  and  li.  48,  54  with  Is.  Ixvi.  6  ;  v.  6-9 
with  Hos.  xiii.  7,  8;  viii.   5  with  Hos.  xi.  7;  ix.  12  with 
Eos.  xiv,  9  ;  xii.  4  with  Hos.  iv.  3;  xiv.  10  with  Hos.  viii.  13 
and  ix.  9  ;  xxxi.  20  with  Hos.  xi.  8 ;   xxxi.  27  with  Hos.  ii. 
23  ;  xlix.  27  with  Amos  i.  4  ;  xlix.  3  with  Amos  i.  15  ;  xlvi. 
6  with  Amos  ii.  14;  xlviii.  24  with  Amos  i.  12  and  ii.  2;  xxv. 
30  with  Amos  i.  2  ;  xxxi.  35  with  Amos  iv.  13  ;  xliv.  11  with 
Amos  ix.  4,  8  ;  X.   19,  xiv.  17  and  xxx.  12  with  Nalium  iil 
19  ;  I.  and  li.  with  Nahum  ii.  13,  14  and  iii.  13,  17.^ 

(16).  Damascus  stands  next  in  order.  Of  the  judgment  on  DamaBcna. 
this  place  but  little  is  said.  "  The  burden  of  Damascus.  Be- 
hold, Damascus  is  taken  away  from  being  a  city,  and  it  shall 
be  a  ruinous  heap"  (Is.  xvii.  i).  This  professes  to  have  been 
uttered  two  thousand  six  hundred  years  ago,  but  the  sentence 
remains  still  unexecuted.  Jerusalem  and  the  Jews  have  passed 
away,  but  Damascus  continues  one  of  the  most  flourishing  cities 

of  the  East. 

(17).  "  The  burden  of  Tyre.  Howl,  ye  ships  of  Tarshish  ;  for  Tyre, 
it  is  laid  waste,  so  that  there  is  no  house,  no  entering  in  :  from 
the  land  of  Chittim  it  is  revealed  to  them.— Pass  ye  over  to 
Tarshish  ;  howl,  ye  inhabitants  of  the  isle.  Is  this  your  joy- 
ous city,  whose  antiquity  is  of  ancient  days  ?  her  own  feet  shall 
carry  her  afar  off  to  sojourn.— The  Lord  hath  given  a  com- 
mandment against  the  merchant  city,  to  destroy  the  strong 
holds  thereof.— Behold  the  land  of  the  Chaldeans  ;  this  people 
was  not,  till  the  Assyrian  founded  it  for  them  that  dwell  in 
the  wilderness.— Howl,  ye  ships  of  Tarshish:  for  your  strength 
is  laid  waste"  (Isa.  xxiii.  1-14). 

1  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament,  IIL  46,  241,  258,  265,  302. 

O 


210 


PROPHECY. 


PROPHECY. 


211 


— to  be 
desolate 
seventy 
years. 


Siege  by 
Nebuchad- 
nezzar. 


It  is  difficult  to  GiX  these  sayings  with  a  precise  meaning.  It 
is  to  be  gathered  that  Tyre  was  to  be  attacked,  apparently  by 
the  Assyrians,  that  her  strongholds  were  to  be  overthrown,  her 
fleets  destroyed,  and  her  inhabitants  driven  to  seek  refuge  else- 
where. Events  of  this  character  are  scarcely  of  sufficient  mark 
to  afford  means  through  which  to  trace  the  action  of  prophecy. 
But  vague  as  are  the  prophet  s  statements,  they  are  not  sup- 
ported by  history.  Isaiah  lived  in  the  days  of  the  Assyrian 
empire,  and  could  thus  be  personally  cognizant  of  its  operations. 
Tyre  was  besieged  by  Shalmaneser,  but  unsuccessfully.  The 
Tyrian  fleet  scattered  that  of  the  enemy,  and  "  the  renown  of 
all  in  Tyre  was  bruited  abroad  on  account  of  these  exploits."  ^ 
There  was  thus  no  overthrow  of  the  navy  of  Tyre,  nor  cause 
for  the  evacuation  of  the  city  by  its  inhabitants.  These 
materials  are  drawn  from  Joseph  us. 

After  this  Isaiah  has  something  explicit.  ''And  it  shall 
come  to  pass  in  that  day,  that  Tyre  shall  be  forgotten  seventy 
years,  according  to  the  days  of  one  king  :  after  the  end  of 
seventy  years  shall  Tyre  sing  as  an  harlot. — And  it  shall  come 
to  pass  after  the  end  of  seventy  years,  that  the  Lord  will  visit 
Tyre,  and  she  shall  turn  to  her  hire,  and  shall  commit  fornica- 
tion with  all  the  kingdoms  of  the  world  upon  the  face  of  the 
earth.  And  her  merchandise  and  her  hire  shall  be  holiness  to 
the  Lord  :  it  shall  not  be  treasured  nor  laid  up  ;  for  her  mer- 
chandise shall  be  for  them  that  dwell  before  the  Lord,  to  eat 
sufficiently,  and  for  durable  clothing"  (Isa.  xxiii.  15-18). 

It  would  seem  that  the  prophet's  meaning  is  that  Tyre  was 
to  lie  desolate  for  a  term  of  seventy  years;  that  after  this  her 
trade  was  to  revive,  but  that  the  wealth  she  might  then  accu- 
mulate was  reserved  for  others,  favoured  of  God,  to  whom  it 
was  to  be  allotted.  The  period  was  a  "  round  prophetic"  one, 
for  which  there  has  been  no  fulfilment.  Had  the  consequences 
of  the  first  siege  entailed  a  ruin  enduring  for  seventy  years,  the 
city  would  not  have  been  in  circumstances  to  invite  the  second 
siege  that  occurred,  about  a  hundred  years  later,  by  Nebu- 
chadnezzar.^ 

The  siege  by  Nebuchadnezzar  occupied  the  pen  of  Ezekiel, 
who  lived  in  those  days.  "  Thus  saith  the  Lord  God,"  he 
declares,  "  they  shall  destroy  the  walls  of  Tyrus,  and  break 
down   her  towers  ;  I  will  also   scrape  her  dust  from  her,  and 

1  Dr  R.  Williams'  Hebrew  Prophets,  348.  »  Idem,  349,  353. 


I 


make  her  like  the  top  of  a  rode.     It  shall  be  a  place  for  the 
spreading  of  nets  in  the  midst  of  the  sea  ;  for  I  have  spoken 
it,  saith  the   Lord  God  :  and   it  shall  become  a   spoil  to  the 
nations. — For  thus  saith  the  Lord  God  ;  Behold,  I  will  bring 
upon  Tyrus,  Nebuchadnezzar  king  of  Babylon. — He  shall  set 
engines  of  war  against  thy  walls,  and  with  his  axes   he   shall 
break  down  thy  towers. — With  the  hoofs  of  his  horses  he  shall 
tread  down   all  thy   streets  ;  he  shall   slay  thy  people   by  the 
sword,  and  thy  strong  garrisons  shall  go  down  to  the   ground. 
And  they  shall  make  a  spoil  of  thy  riches,  and  make  a  prey  of 
thy  merchandise  ;  and   they  shall  break  down   thy  walls,  and 
destroy  thy  pleasant   houses  ;   and   they  shall   lay  thy  stones 
and  thy  timber  and  thy  dust  in  the  midst  of  the  water.     And 
I  will  cause  the  noise  of  thy  songs  to  cease  ;  and  the  sound  of 
thy  harps  shall  be  no  more  heard.     And  I  will  make  thee  like 
the  top  of  a  rock  :  thou  shalt  be  a  place  to  spread  nets  upon  ; 
thou  shalt  be  built  no  more  :  for  I   the   Lord   have  spoken  it, 
saith  the  Lord  God. — I  will  make  thee  a  terror,  and  thou  shalt 
be  no  more  :  though  thou  be  sought  for,  yet  shalt  thou  never 
be  found  again,  saith  the  Lord  God. — Thy  riches — shall  fall 
into  the  midst  of  the  seas  in  the  day  of  thy  ruin. — They  shall 
lament   over  thee,  saying.  What  city  is  like   Tyrus,  like  the 
destroyed  in  the  midst  of  the  sea  ? — In  the  time  when  thou 
shalt  be  broken  by  the  seas  in  the  depths  of  the  waters,  thy 
merchandise  and  all  thy  company  in  the  midst   of  thee  shall 
fall. — Thou  shalt  die  the   deaths   of  them  that  are   slain  in 
the  midst  of  the  seas." 

These  denunciations  appear  in  the  twenty-sixth,  twenty- 
seventh,  and  twenty-eighth  chapters  of  Ezekiel,  and  their  pur- 
port is  plain.  Nebuchadnezzar  was  to  assault  insular  Tyre,  and 
Taring  her  to  utter  ruin.  All  within  her  was  to  be  broken 
down  and  destroyed,  and  her  wealth  was  to  be  plundered  or 
cast  out  into  the  surrounding  waters.  The  siege  by  Nebu- 
chadnezzar, we  learn  from  Josephus,  endured  thirteen  years. 
But  it  did  not  end  as  foreseen  by  the  prophet.  The  efforts  of 
Nebuchadnezzar  proved  unavailing,  and  Tyre  made  a  success- 
ful resistance.  So  far  from  being  laid  bare  like  a  rock,  and 
consigned  to  irremediable  ruin,  so  that  she  should  be  built 
upon  no  more,  and  when  looked  for  not  found,  she  flourished 
after  this  for  three  hundred   years,  and  then  succumbed   at  a 


212 


PROPHECY. 


third  siege  undertaken  by  Alexander  the  Great.^  This  lay 
far  beyond  the  day  of  the  prophet ;  and  he,  consequently, 
shows  no  knowledge  of  the  event. 

In  a  subsequent  passage  Nebuchadnezzar  is  represented  not 
to  have  met  with  his  reward  in  Tyre,  and  compensation  is 
given  him  in  Egypt.  "  And  it  came  to  pass,"  the  prophet 
states,  '*  in  the  seven  and  twentieth  year,  in  the  first  month,  in 
the  first  day  of  the  month,  the  word  of  the  Lord  came  unto 
me,  saying,  Son  of  man,  Nebuchadnezzar,  king  of  Babylon, 
caused  his  army  to  serve  a  great  service  against  Tyrus  :  every 
head  was  made  bald,  and  every  shoulder  was  peeled  ;  yet  had 
he  no  wages,  nor  his  army,  for  Tyrus,  for  the  service  that  he 
had  served  against  it.  Therefore,  thus  saith  the  Lord  God  ; 
Behold,  I  will  give  the  land  of  Egypt  unto  Nebuchadnezzar, 
king  of  Babylon ;  and  he  shall  take  her  multitude,  and  take 
her  spoil,  and  take  her  prey  ;  and  it  shall  be  the  wages  for  his 
army.  I  have  given  him  the  land  of  Egypt  for  his  labour, 
wherewith  he  served  against  it,  because  they  wrought  for  me, 
saith  the  Lord  God"  (Ezek.  xxix.  17-20).  The  prophet 
makes  this  declaration,  as  it  would  appear  from  the  marginal 
dates,  sixteen  years  after  he  had  predicted  that  the  spoil  of 
Tyre  should  fall  to  Babylon.  In  the  interval  the  event  turned 
out  otherwise.  The  writer,  consequently,  corrects  his  state- 
ment, and  thus  negatives,  under  his  own  hand,  his  title  to  be 
accepted  as  a  prophet. 

The  amended  representations  suggest  singular  reflections. 
A  pagan  power,  bent  upon  self-aggrandizement,  and  actuated 
by  greed,  attacks  the  territory  of  another  such  power,  tempted 
by  her  seemingly  insignificant  resources  for  resistance  and  her 
great  wealth  accumulated  in  commerce.  God  has  no  relations 
with  either  of  these  nations,  having  shut  himself  up  elsewhere 
with  a  peculiar  people  of  his  own.  Yet  he  views  the  aggres- 
sion as  a  piece  of  service  to  himself  and  meriting  acknowledge- 
ment and  recompense.  Rapine  is  to  be  the  medium  of  the 
reward  ;  but  this  not  having  been  secured  in  the  direction 
intended,  a  third  power,  wholly  unconnected  with  the  expedi- 
tion, is  given  up  to  be  plundered  in  lieu.  The  same  thought 
of  the  remuneration  of  such  an  aggressor,  as  coming  under  the 
appointment  of  God,  appears  to  be  presented  by  Isaiah,  where, 
in  a  passage  I  have  already  cited,  he  speaks  of  the  "  merchan- 

»  Hebrew  Prophets,  348,  349. 


PROPHECY. 


213 


dise  "  of  Tyre  being  laid  up  as  "holiness  to  the  Lord,"  or  de- 
voted to  his  purposes,  to  be  reserved  "  for  them  that  dwell 
before  the  Lord."  The  editing  of  Isaiah  being  traceable  as  far 
onwards  as  the  end  of  the  captivity  in  Babylon,"  prophetic 
utterances  made  in  his  name  might  readily  embrace  the  times 
of  Nebuchadnezzar.  In  both  cases,  however,  the  prevision  of 
these  prophets  proves  erroneous.  Tyre  did  not  fall  as  pre- 
dicted under  the  assaults  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  nor  was  her  wealth 
made  over  as  plunder  to  his  forces. 

With  Tyre  the  circuit  is  completed  of  the  nations  or  tribes 
surrouudiug  Judea  on  its  frontiers.  A  wider  range  compre- 
hends Assyria,  Babylon,  and  Greece,  beyond  which  the  pro- 
phetic observations  do  not  reach.  With  Greece  I  need  not  deal, 
as  what  is  said  of  it  appears  only  in  Daniel,  whose  predictions, 
there  is  room  to  conclude,  were  written  after  the  events. 

(18.)  Assyria.      The  downfall  of  the  capital  city  Nineveh  is  Assyria, 
proclaimed  by  Nahum.     History  does  not  supply  us  with  the 
means  of  judging  of  the  accuracy  of  his  details,  which,  more- 
over, are  not  of  a  very  pronounced  character.    Nahum  describes 
himself  as  an  Elkoshite.      It  is  uncertain  where  Elkosh  may 
have  been.    Some  suppose  in  Galilee,  others  in  Assyria.    There 
is  a  tomb  shown  as  that  of  the  prophet  at  Mosul,  near  the 
site  of  Nineveh.      Nahum  writes  as  one  on  the  spot,  describ- 
ing what  was  before  his  eyes,  and  the  inference  is  that  he  was 
an  exile  in  Assyria.     Josephus  places  him  a  hundred  and  fifteen 
years  before  the  fall  of  Nineveh.      "  If,"  says  Dr  Williams,  from 
whom  I  am  drawing  my  observations,  "  we  concede  this  writer's 
good  faith,  we  may  doubt  his  accuracy."      "  The  first  impression 
left  by  a  dispassionate  perusal  of  our  prophet  is  that  of  contem- 
poraneousness, or  subsequence,  to  the  events  which  he  narrates. 
The  defenders  are  fallen,  the  assailants  hasten  to  the  wall,  the 
siege-screen  is  set  fast,  the  city  is  taken,  her  daughters  moan 
as   doves,  her  people  refuse  to  rally,  she  becomes  a  pool  of 
waters."      "  The  allusion  to  Judah  is  an  anticipation  how  she 
will  receive  the  news  from  afar ;   the  description  of  the  scarlet 
Modes,  and  of  the  river-gates  bursting,  is  by  one  who  had  seen 

with  his  eyes."  ^ 

In  the  uncertainty  who  Nahum  was,  or  when  he  lived,  and  -^^^^ 
in  view  also  of  the  vagueness  of  his  statements  and  the  want  restoration 
of  historic  test,  it  is  impossible  to  satisfy  ourselves  that  his  <^^  ^^^^• 

1  Hebrew  Prophets,  431-435. 


214 


PROPHECY. 


Babylon. 


Utterances  were  really  prophetic.  Other  references  complete 
the  difficulty.  ''  When  the  Lord,"  we  are  told,  ''  hath  per- 
formed his  whole  work  upon  Mount  Zion  and  on  Jerusalem,  I 
will  punish  the  fruit  of  the  stout  heart  of  the  king  of  Assyria 
and  the  glory  of  his  high  looks  "  (Isa.  x.  12).  "  But  thou,  Beth- 
lehem Ephratah,  though  thou  be  little  among  the  thousands  of 
Judah,  yet  out  of  thee  shall  he  come  forth  unto  me  that  is  to  be 
ruler  in  Israel ;  whose  goings  forth  have  been  from  of  old  from 
everlasting. — Now  shall  he  be  great  unto  the  ends  of  the 
earth.  And  this  man  shall  be  the  peace  when  the  Assyrian 
shall  come  into  our  land,  and  when  he  shall  tread  in  our 
palaces. — And  they  shall  waste  the  land  of  Assyria  with  the 
sword,  and  the  land  of  Nimrod  in  the  entrances  thereof:  thus 
shall  he  deliver  us  from  the  Assyrian  when  he  cometh  into  our 
land,  and  when  he  treadeth  within  our  borders.  And  the 
remnant  of  Jacob  shall  be  in  the  midst  of  many  people  as  a 
dew  from  the  Lord,  as  the  showers  upon  the  grass  ; — as  a  lion 
among  the  beasts  of  the  forest,  as  a  young  lion  among  the  flocks 
of  sheep  "  (Mic.  v.  2-8).  Nahum  himself  writes  in  the  same 
strain.  "  Behold  upon  the  mountains  the  feet  of  him  that 
bringeth  good  tidings,  that  pubhsheth  peace  !  0  Judah,  keep 
thy  solemn  feasts,  perform  thy  vows  :  for  the  wicked  shall  no 
more  pass  through  thee;  he  is  utterly  cut  off"  (Nah.  i.  15). 
In  Isaiah  the  same  passage  appears  with  an  ampHfication. 
*'  How  beautiful  upon  the  mountains  are  the  feet  of  him  that 
bringeth  good  tidings,  that  publisheth  peace;  that  bringeth 
good  tidings  of  good,  that  pubhsheth  salvation  ;  that  saith  unto 
Zion,  Thy  God  reigneth  ! "  (Isa.  lii.  7).  The  time  is  that  of 
the  still  future  redemption  of  Israel  and  the  reign  of  the  Mesr 
siah.  The  overthrow  of  Assyria  was  to  be  dependant  thereon. 
The  same  representations  pervade  these  several  prophets,  the 
one,  doubtless,  taking  up  his  ideas  from  the  other.  On  one 
occasion  the  thought  is  expressed  in  identity  of  language,  and 
seen,  therefore,  to  have  been  borrowed.  But  the  march  of 
time  has  placed  them  all  in  the  wrong.  Nearly  two  thousand 
five  hundred  years  ago  the  Assyrian  empire  was  put  an  end  to, 
but  where  is  the  redemption  of  Israel  ?  where  the  rule  of  her 
Messiah  ? 

(19).  Babylon.  The  domination  passed  from  Nineveh  to 
this  city.  The  prophecies  respecting  Babylon  and  her  terri- 
tories are  ample  and  precise,  and  it  is  commonly  thought,  and 


PROPHECY. 


215 


I 


taught,  that  they  have  been  literally  fulfilled.  I  gave  the 
subject  attention  some  twenty  years  ago,  and  from  what  I  then 
wrote  I  derive  my  present  materials. 

First,  as  to  the  city  and  its  site.      "  It  shall  be  no  more 
inhabited  for  ever ;  neither  shall  it  be  dwelt  in  from  genera- 
tion to  generation.     As  God  overthrew  Sodom  and  Gomorrah, 
and  the  neighbour  cities  thereof,  saith  the  Lord  ;  so  shall  no 
man  abide  there,  neither  shall  any  son  of  man  dwell  therein " 
(Jer.  1.  39,  40).    Mr  Rich  in  his  Memoir  of  Babylon,  and  Sir 
Robert  Ker  Porter  in  his  Travels,  have  noted  the  existence  of 
a  town  and  five  villages  within  the  limits  of  ancient  Babylon. 
The  town  is  Hillah,  and  the  villages  are  Anana,  Jumjuma, 
Tajaca,  Tahmasia,  and  another  to  the  northward  not  named. 
The  locality  also  contains  date  plantations  and  cultivated  lands. 
Hillah   and    its  neighbourhood   are   thus   described.      "It   is 
meanly  built,  and  its  population  between  six  and  seven  thou- 
sand.     The  gardens  on  both  sides  the  river  are  very  extensive, 
so  that  the  town  itself  from  a  little  distance  appears  embosomed 
in  a  wood  of  date  trees.      The  air  is  salubrious,  and  the  soil 
extremely  fertile,  producing  great  quantities  of  rice,  dates,  and 
grain  of  different  kinds."  ^      ''Lying  on  a  spot  of  the  vast  site 
of  Babylon,— the  town  is  pleasantly  situated  amidst  gardens  and 
groves  of  date  trees.    The  great  centre  bazaar  is  well  filled  with 
merchandise.     As  far  as  the  eye  can  reach  from  the  town,  both 
up  and  down  the  Euphrates,  the  banks  appear  to  be  thickly 
shaded  with  groves  of  date  trees. — We  came  upon  a  good  deal  of 
cultivated  ground,  over  which  we  took  our  course  for  more  than  a 
mile.     Tahmasia  stands  in  the  bosom  of  an  extensive  wood  of 
date  trees.      Vestiges  of  ruins  are  seen  all  along  between  this 
and  the  village  of  Anana. — We  did  not  halt  there  (at  Tahmasia), 
but  passed  on  over  two  miles  of  cultivation  and  high  grass,  at 
which  extremity  a  vast  tract  opened  before  us,  covered  with 
every  minor  vestige  of  former  building."'     "Hillah,  next  to 
Baghdad  and   Busrah,  is  the  largest  town  in  the  Pachalic ; 
well  built  mosques  and  extensive  bazaars  bespeak  it  opulence. 
The  number  of  its  inhabitants  is  estimated  at  twenty-five  thou- 
sand.    Fruit,  grain,  and  other  provisions,  are  cheap  and  plenti- 
ful at  Hillah,  and  boats  are  constantly  arriving  from  various 
parts.     Those   from   the  northern    parts   of   the  Jezerat  are 

1  Rich's  Memoir.  '  Sir  R.  K.  Porter's  Travels. 


216 


PROPHECY. 


usually  laden  with  rice  ;  those  from  Lemlun  and  Busrah  with 
dates,  iish,  coffee,  &c."^ 

The  time  that  these  travellers  visited  Babylon  was  between 
the  years  1811  and  1830.  I  was  there  in  1835,  and  can  con- 
firm their  observations. 

"The  word  that  the  Lord  spake"  was  not  only  "against 
Babylon,"   but  included  also   "  the  land  of  the  Chaldeans " 
(Jer.  1.  1).      "  Her  cities  are  a  desolation,  a  dry  land,  and  a 
wilderness,  a  land  wherein  no  man  dwelleth "   (Jer.   li.   43). 
"  Prepare  slaughter  for  his  children  for  the  iniquity  of  their 
fathers ;  that  they  do  not  rise,  nor  possess  the  land,  nor  fill  the 
face  of  the  world  with  cities.     For  I  will  rise  up  against  them, 
saith  the  Lord  of  Hosts,  and  cut  off  from  Babylon  the  name, 
and  remnant,  and  son,  and  nephew,  saith  the  Lord. — I  will 
sweep  it  with  the  besom  of  destruction,  saith  the  Lonl  "  (Isa. 
xiv.  21-23).     There  was  to  be  an  utter  end  made  of  the  redon 
doomed,   with  no   opening  allowed  for  its   resuscitation.      Dr 
Keith,  who  labours  to  show  the  fulfilment  of  these  and   other 
prophecies,  gives  abundant  grounds  for  coming  to  a  contrary 
conclusion  in  the  present  instanca      Such,  he  says,  was  "the 
Chaldee's  excellency,"  that  it  departed  not  on  the  first  con- 
quest, nor  on  the  final  extinction  of  its  capital,  but  one  metro- 
polis of  Assyria  rose  after  another  in  the  land  of  Chaldea,  when 
Babylon  had  ceased  to  be  "  the  glory  of  the  kingdoms."      He 
speaks  of  Seleucia,  founded  B.C.    293,  and  containing  in  the 
first  century  of  the  Christian  era  six  hundred  thousand   in- 
habitants, and  of  Ctesiphon,  to  which  the  seat  of  empire  was 
transferred  by  the  Parthian  kings,  and  which   became  great 
and  powerful.      Six  centuries  after  the  latest  of  the  predic- 
tions,  he   tells  us,    Chaldea   could  also  boast  of  other  great 
cities,   such  as  Artemita  and  Sitacene,  besides   many  towns. 
When  invaded  by  Julian,  it  was,  as  described  by  Gibbon,  "  a 
fruitful  and   pleasant  country,"  and   in  the   seventh  century 
Chaldea  was  the  scene  of  vast  magnificence  in  the  reign  of 
Chosroes.      His  favourite  residence  was  Artemita,  or    Desta- 
gered.      "  The  adjacant  pastures,"  says  Gibbon,  "  were  covered 
with  flocks  and  herds  ;  the  paradise,  or  park,  was  replenished 
with  pheasants,  peacocks,  ostriches,  roebucks,  and  wild   boars ; 
and  the  noble  game  of  lions  and  tigers  was  sometimes  turned 
loose  for  the  golden  pleasures  of  the  chase."     In  the  sixth  cen- 

1  Wellsted's  Travels,  by  Ormsby. 


PROPHECY. 


217 


tury  the  towns  of  Samarah,  Horounieh,  and  Djasserik,  formed, 
so  to  speak,  one  street  of  twenty-eight  miles.^  Baghdad,  the 
new  capital,  situate  about  fifteen  miles  from  Seleucia  and 
Ctesiphon,  and  forty  eight  from  Hillah,  was  long  the  imperial 
seat  of  the  princely  caliphs,  and  is  still  an  important  and 
wealthy  city,  the  capital  of  a  Turkish  pachalic.  It  is  sur- 
rounded by  extensive  date  groves,  gardens,  and  cultivation. 
There  are  villages  in  its  vicinity,  and  two  important  towns 
further  up  the  Tigris,  Meshed  Ali  and  Meshed  Housein,  sacred 
to  the  Sheahs.  Whatever,  therefore,  the  destruction  of  cities 
in  the  land  of  Chaldea,  they  have  sprung  up,  in  succession, 
and  still  represent  a  considerable  region  of  population.  '*  At 
Dewannea,"  says  Wellsted,  "  the  district  of  Hillah  commences. 
The  centre  of  the  river  is  here  occupied  by  small  islands, 
several  of  which  during  the  floods  are  completely  inundated, 
but  now  expose  verdant  and  cultivated  fields  of  grain  and 
vegetables,  the  banks  on  either  hand  are  studied  with  villages, 
and  small  villas  surrounded  by  gardens  enliven  the  picture. 
These  belong  to  opulent  merchants  from  Hillah,  who  pass  the 
hot  months  within  them.  The  country  in  other  respects  pre- 
sents a  pleasing  contrast  to  that  which  we  quitted;  the  soft  and 
graceful  foliage  of  the  willow  now  entwines  its  branches  with 
the  date-palms,  or  flings  its  shadows  over  the  silent  and  tran- 
quil waters  of  the  river."  The  prospect  evidently  improved 
upon  the  traveller  as  he  approached  the  site  of  the  prophet- 
stricken  Babylon. 

''Neither,"  it  is  further  predicted  of  this  site,  "shall  the  Arabmn 
Arabian  pitch  tent  there  "  (Isa.  xiii.  20).  I  was  struck,  when  pitch  tent 
in  the  midst  of  the  ruins  of  Babylon,  with  indubitable  marks 
of  an  Arab  encampment  among  them,  consisting  in  pillars  of 
clay,  hollowed  out  at  the  top,  and  arranged  as  mangers  for  their 
horses  ;  a  provision  not  made  except  when  the  camp  is  to  be 
stationary  for  a  time.  The  Arabs  range  over  the  whole  region, 
and  naturally  make  use  of  the  site  of  the  ancient  city  as  of 
any  other  unoccupied  spaces.  I  am  supported  in  my  observa- 
tion by  Sir  Robert  Ker  Porter,  After  passing  Mujalil>e,  a  ruin 
at  the  northern  limit,  he  says,  "  Our  road  bent  from  the  im- 
mediate bank  of  the  river  to  the  south-east ;  and  after  crossing 
the  bed  of  a  very  wide  canal,  almost  close  to  the  bank  we  were 
leaving,  we  entered  on  an  open  tract,  on  which  I  saw  the  ex- 

»  Keith  on  Prophecy,  273-330  ;  23d  edition. 


218 


PKOPHECY. 


None  to 

pass 

thereby. 


No  stone 
thereof  to 
be  uiied. 


tensive  encampment  of  Kiahya  Beg.  The  town  of  HlUah  lay 
a  couple  of  miles  beyond  it.  It  was  principally  made  up  of 
bodies  of  men  collected  from  distant  tribes"  (of  Arabs  obviously). 
He  goes  on  to  say,  "We  then  bent  our  steps  to  the  lines  of  an 
old  Arab  Sheikh  called  Mahmoud  Bassani,  who  with  his  tribe 
had  adhered — to  the  pashalick  of  Baghdad.  As  soon  as  we 
arrived  in  sight  of  his  camp  we  were  met  by  crowds  of  its 
inhabitants."  The  position  of  this  encampment,  within  two 
miles  of  Hillah,  must  have  been  four  miles  within  the  boundary 
of  the  ancient  city,  the  extent  of  which,  according  to  Herodotus, 
was  a  square  of  twelve  miles  on  each  side,  Hillah  being  exactly 
half  way,  measuring  from  east  to  west. 

Another  declaration  as  to  the  site  of  Babylon  is,  "  Neither 
doth  any  son  of  man  pass  thereby  "  (Jer.  li.  43).  So  far  from 
this  being  the  case,  it  is  a  regular  and  well-trodden  thorough- 
fare. Besides  the  intercourse  of  the  natives  and  the  conduct 
of  their  traffic,  both  by  water  and  land,  numerous  well-known 
travellers  have  visited  and  passed  through  this  region,  among 
whom  I  may  mention  Niebuhr,  Thevanot,  Dalla  Valle,  Abulfedi, 
Captain  Frederick,  Major  Keppel,  Colonel  Kinneir,  Mr  Buck- 
ingham, and  Captain  Mignan,  besides  Rich,  Porter,  and  Ormsby, 
whose  observations  I  have  already  cited.  "  Between  Baghdad 
and  Hillah,"  observes  Mr  Rich,  "at  convenient  distances  khans 
or  caravanserais  are  erected  for  the  accommodation  of  travellers, 
and  to  each  of  them  is  attached  a  small  village  of  Fellahs." 
The  Sheikh  of  the  Zobeide  Arabs  ''  is  responsible  for  the 
security  of  the  road." 

Another  prediction  is,  "They  shall  not  take  of  thee  a  stone 
for  a  corner,  nor  a  stone  for  foundations  "  (Jer.  li.  26).  "They 
had  brick,"  it  is  observed,  "for  stone"  (Gen.  xi.  3).  This  prophecy 
has  equally  failed  of  effect.  "  I  had  seen,"  states  Sir  R.  K.  Porter, 
"  many  of  the  Babylonian  bricks  at  Hillah  forming  the  court 
and  walls  of  the  house  I  inhabited  ;  and  which  had  been 
brought  from  the  mounds  of  the  ancient  great  city  to  assist  in 
erecting  the  modern  miserable  town.  In  the  more  modern 
structures  of  Baghdad,  Hillah,  and  other  places  erected  out  of 
her  spoils,  these  inscribed  bricks  are  seen  facing  outwards  in 
all  directions. — From  her  fallen  towers  have  arisen,  not  only 
all  the  present  cities  in  her  vicinity,  but  others,  which  like 
herself  are  long  ago  gone  down  into  the  dust.  Since  the  days 
of  Alexander,  we  find  four  capitals  at  least  built  out  of  her 


PROPHECY. 


219 


remains.      Seleucia  by  the  Greeks,  Ctesiphon  by  the  Parthians, 
At  Maidan  by  the  Persians,  and  Kufa  by  the  Caliphs,  with 
towns,  villages,  and  caravanserais  without  number.     Scarce  a 
day  passed  without  my  seeing  people  digging  the  mounds  of 
Babylon  for  bricks,  which  they  carried  to  the  verge  of  the 
Euphrates,   and    thence  conveyed  in  boats  to  wherever  they 
might  be  wanted."     So  also  Mr  Rich.      "  The  walls  (of  Hillah) 
are  of  mud,  and  present  a  truly  contemptible  appearance  ;  but 
the  present  Pasha  of  Baghdad  has  ordered  a  new  wall  to  be 
constructed  of  the  finest  Babylonian  bricks. — The  bricks  (of 
the  ruin  called  Al  Kasr)  are  of  the  finest  description,  and  not- 
withstanding this  is  the  grand  store-house  of  them,  and  that 
the  greatest  supplies  have  been  and  are  now  constantly  drawn 
from  it,  they  appear  to  be  abundant." 

The  destruction  of  Babylon  was  to  be  effected  by  one  sud-  Destruc- 
den  and  final  blow.      "  And  it  shall  be,  when  thou  hast  made  ^^^^^^]^ 
an  end  of  reading  this  book,  that  thou  shalt  bind  a  stone  to  it, 
and  cast  it  into  the  midst  of  Euphrates  :  and  thou  shalt  say, 
thus  shall  Babylon  sink,  and  shall  not  rise  from  the  evil  that  I 
will  bring  upon  her"  (Jer.  li.  63,  64).      "These  two  things 
shall   come    to   thee    in   a  moment,  in    one   day,  the  loss  of 
children,  and  widowhood  :  they  shall  come  upon  thee  in  their 
perfection. — Desolation  shall  come  upon  thee  suddenly"  (Isa. 
xlvii.  9,  11).      ''  Cast  her  up  as  heaps,  and  destroy  her  utterly: 
let  nothing  of  her  be  left. — Thy  day  is  come,  the  time  that  I 
will  visit  thee,  and  the  most  proud  shall  stumble  and  fall,  and 
none  shall  raise  him  up"  (Jer.  I.  26,  31,  32).      "Babylon  is 
suddenly  fallen  and  destroyed  :    howl  for  her  ;  take  l>alm  for 
her  pain,  if  so  be  she  may  be  healed.      We  would  have  healed 
Babylon,  but   she  is   not  healed  :  forsake  her,  and  let  us  go 
every  one  into  his  own   country  :  for  her  judgment  reacheth 
unto  heaven,  and  is  lifted  up  even  to  the  skies.— 0  thou  that 
dwellest  upon  many  waters,  abundant  in  treasures,  thine  end 
is  come,  and  the  measure  of  thy  covetousness"  (Jer.  h.  8,  9, 
13).      Dr  Keith,  while  endeavouring  to  show  the  completion 
of  the  prophecy,  gives  abundant  proofs  that  the  end  of  Babylon 
was  not  effected  in  the  manner  predicted.      "  A  succession  of 
ages,"  he  says,   "  brought  it  gradually  to  the  dust ;  and  the 
gradation  of  its  fall  is  marked  till  it  sunk  at  last  into  utter 
desolation.— It  fell  before  every  hand  that  was  raised  against 
it     Yet  its  greatness  did  not  depart,  nor  was  its  glory  obscured 


220 


PROPHECY. 


PROPHECY. 


221 


— to  be  by 
fire. 


in  a  day.  Cjn-us  was  not  its  destroyer  ;  but  he  sought  by  wise 
institutions  to  perpetuate  its  pre-eminence  among  the  nations. 
He  left  it  to  his  successor  in  all  its  strength  and  magnificence. 
Rebelling  against  Darius,  the  Babylonians  made  preparations 
for  a  siege,  and  bade  defiance  to  the  whole  power  of  the  Per- 
sian empire. — In  the  twentieth  month  of  the  siege  (through  a 
ruse)  was  Babylon  a  second  time  taken. — Babylon  was  a  third 
time  taken  by  Alexander  the  Great,  and — afterwards  succes- 
sively by  Antigonus,  by  Demetrius,  by  Antiochus  the  Great, 
and  by  the  Parthians. — Each  step  in  the  progress  of  the  de- 
cline of  Babylon  was  the  accomplishment  of  a  prophecy. — 
Babylon  was  soon  resorted  to  again,  but  the  vicinity  of  the 
city  of  Seleucia,  built  on  very  purpose,  tended  greatly  to  its 
abandonment  and  decay,  and  was  the  chief  cause  of  the  de- 
cline of  Babylon  as  a  city,  and  drained  it  of  a  great  part  of 
its  population. — The  progressive  and  predicted  decline  of 
Babylon  the  great,  till  it  ceased  to  be  a  city,  has- already  been 
briefly  detailed.  About  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  era  a 
small  portion  of  it  was  inhabited,  and  the  far  greater  part  was 
cultivated.  It  diminished  as  Seleucia  increased,  and  the 
latter  became  the  greater  city.  In  the  second  century  nothing 
but  the  walls  remained.  It  became  gradually  a  great  desert."^ 
Babylon  thus  did  not  sink  once  and  for  ever  like  a  stone 
thrown  into  deep  waters.  She  was  subjected  to  seven  succes- 
sive conquests,  and  survived  them  all,  and  was  made  desolate, 
not  by  a  sudden  catastrophe,  but  by  the  gradual  migration  of 
her  inhabitants  to  the  new  capital.  Seven  centuries  after  her 
first  fall  her  walls  were  in  existence,  and  at  this  moment  vil- 
lages, and  a  commercial  town,  with  their  attendant  groves, 
gardens,  and  cultivation,  are  on  her  site. 

The  predicted  instrument  of  her  destruction  was  fire.  "  The 
most  proud  shall  stumble  and  fall,  and  none  shall  raise  him 
up  :  and  I  will  kindle  a  fire  in  his  cities,  and  it  shall  devour 
all  round  about  him"  (Jer.  1.  32).  "I  will  make  thee  a 
burnt  mountain. — The  broad  walls  of  Babylon  shall  be  utterly 
broken,  and  her  gates  shall  be  burnt  with  fire  ;  and  the  people 
shall  labour  in  vain,  and  the  folk  in  the  fire  (to  extinguish  it), 
and  they  shall  be  weary"  (Jer.  li.  25,  58).  "And  Babylon, 
the  glory  of  kingdoms,  the  beauty  of  the  Chaldee's  excellency, 

»  Keith  on  Prophecy,  272-332. 


1 


shall  be  as  when  God  overthrew  Sodom  and  Gomorrah" 
(Isa.  xiii.  19).  Such,  however,  was  not  the  manner  of  her 
end.  She  sank  by  no  particular  act  of  judgment,  but  was 
wasted,  as  we  have  seen,  by  wars  and  the  migration  of  her 

inhabitants. 

(20).   Home.      It  is  a  prevailing  idea  among  the  Protestant  Rome, 
section  of  Christians  that  Rome,  Pagan  and  Popish,  forms  a  l^^^ 
subject  of  prophecy,  and  the  adaptation  they  make  of  current 
events  in  history  to  the  descriptions  in  the  prophetic  records, 
satisfies  them  that  here,  as  in  the  history  of  the  Jewish  nation, 
standing  proofs  of  the  realisation  of  prophecy  are  before  their 
eyes.      It  is  certainly  a  remarkable  circumstance,  if  Rome  is 
thus  the  theme  of  prophecy,  that  nowhere  is  the  name  of  this 
power  put  forward  as  the   object  in  view  in  the  utterances 
made.       We    have    Egypt,  Edom,  Damascus,   Tyre,   Assyria, 
Babylon,  all  denounced  by  name,  but  the  prophets  are  unable 
to  deal  with    equal   openness  with  Rome.      Daniel  and  the 
Apocalypse  are  the  works  which  are  supposed  to  treat  of  Rome. 
The  power  of  Rome  was  not  dominant  in  the  age  of  Daniel, 
and  his  vision  is  exercised  in  a  very  different  manner,  according 
as  he  deals  with  events  that  had  already  come  to  pass  when  he 
wrote,  or  those  which  lay  beyond  him  in  futurity.     In  the  one 
case  his  details  are  precise,  and  the  objects  plainly  indicated ; 
in  the  other  all  is  obscure  and  mysterious,  and  the  application 
to  be  made  quite  uncertain.       The  position  is  otherwise  as 
respects  the  Apocalypse.      The  Roman  power  was  prevailing 
when  that  work  was  put  forth,  and  had  the  writer  intended  the 
state,  or  heresies,  of  Rome,  to  be  understood  as  the  subject  of 
his  delineations,  he  might  have  said  so  distinctly,  as  when  Tyre, 
Babylon,  &c.,  were  in  question  with  the  earlier  prophets.     But 
the  object  of  his  denunciations  does  receive  from  him  a  name, 
and  that  name  is  Babylon.      The  author  is  a  plagiarist.      He 
takes  the  materials  of  his  prophecy,  involving  an  extensive  am- 
plitude of  details,  from  prior  writers,  and  associates  therewith 
the  name  employed  by  them ;  and  it  is  by  a  strange  liberty 
with  the  written  word,  with  a  violent  misuse  of  the  borrowed 
materials,  that  the  subject  he  had  in  view  is  alleged  to  be 
Rome,  not  Babylon.     Isaiah  and  Micah  couple  the  downfall  of 
Assyria  with  the  restitution  of  Israel.    The  empire  passed  from 
Nineveh  to  Babylon,  and  Isaiah  indifferently  styles  the  ruler. 


222 


PROPHECY. 


PROPHECY. 


223 


The  visions 
of  four 
kingdoms 
in  Daniel. 


whose  judgment  is  at  this  time  to  be  meted  out,  the  ''  king  of 
Assyria"  (x.  12),  and  the  ''  king  of  Babylon."  ''  And  it  shall 
come  to  pass  in  the  day  that  the  Lord  shall  give  thee  rest 
from  thy  sorrow,  and  from  thy  fear,  and  from  the  hard  bond- 
age wherein  thou  wast  made  to  serve,  that  thou  shalt  take  up 
this  proverb  against  the  king  of  Babylon,  and  say.  How  hath 
the  oppressor  ceased  !  the  golden  city  ceased ! "  (xiv.  8,  4). 
This  was  the  expected  climax,  and  the  author  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse, falling  into  the  vein  of  those  who  wrote  before  him,  has 
evidently  possessed  himself  with  the  same  idea. 

To  turn  now  to  the  prophecy  in  Daniel.  This  writer,  under 
two  separate  visions,  brings  before  us  four  ruling  powers,  whose 
dominion  is  to  be  put  an  end  to  at  the  time  of  the  great 
consummation  spoken  of  by  Isaiah  and  Micah,  and  it  is  appa- 
rent that  he  is  describing  the  same  catastrophe,  with  the  same 
agency,  which  is  the  subject  of  their  vaticinations.  The  first 
vision  represents  a  great  image,  in  four  parts,  composed  of  gold, 
silver,  brass,  and  iron  mixed  with  clay  ;  the  other,  four  great 
beasts  of  diverse  forms.  The  image  is  broken  to  pieces  by  a 
stone  "  cut  out  without  hands/'  and  the  last  of  the  beasts  is 
destroyed  at  the  time  that  "  one  like  the  Son  of  man"  assumes 
the  empire  over  the  whole  earth.  The  first  vision  indicates 
union  and  consolidation  of  power.  There  is  the  head  of  gold, 
the  breast  and  arms  of  silver,  the  belly  and  thighs  of  brass,  and 
the  legs  of  iron,  with  feet  of  iron  and  clay.  The  one  part  is 
necessary  to  the  other  to  constitute  and  form  the  whole  image, 
and  this  image  is  in  its  entirety,  when  the  stone  cut  out  with- 
out hands  falls  upon  its  feet,  or  the  last  of  its  portions,  and 
crushes  the  whole  into  fragments.  "  Then  was  the  iron,  the 
clay,  the  brass,  the  silver,  and  the  gold,  broken  to  pieces  to- 
gether, and  became  like  the  chaff  of  the  summer  threshing- 
floors."  The  second  vision  represents  individuality,  each  beast 
being  pprfect  and  entire  in  its  particular  form. 

The  nature  of  the  individuality  described  in  the  second  vision 
is  revealed.  "  These  great  beasts,"  it  was  explained  to  Daniel, 
"  which  are  four,  are  four  kings,  which  shall  arise  out  of  the 
earth."  The  individuality  of  the  Son  of  man,  who  supplants 
them,  is  also  apparent.  In  the  other  vision  there  is  the  like 
feature  of  individuality,  with,  however,  the  characteristic  of 
combination.       And    here    also    we    have    an    interpretation. 


''Thou,"  Nebuchadnezzar,  the  then  king  of  Babylon  was  told, 
"  art  this  head  of  gold."  The  two  visions  being  identical  in 
their  purport,  and  one  member  of  the  image  being  an  indivi- 
dual king,  it  follows  that  the  other  three  portions  of  the  image 
represent  the  three  remaining  kings  of  the  second  vision.  The 
stone  which  "smote  the  image"  and  "  became  a  great  moun- 
tain "  that  "  filled  the  whole  earth,"  is  of  course  that  "  Son  of 
man"  who  overthrows  the  dominion  of  the  beasts,  and  estab- 
lishes his  universal  empire,  and  is  the  fifth  individuality. 

It  has  now  to  be  considered  who  were  these  several  per- 
sonages whom  the  prophet  had  in  view.  The  first  member  is 
made  known  to  us  by  revelation.  This  is  Nebuchadnezzar  the 
king  of  Babylon.  The  incorporation  of  the  four  kings  in  one 
great  image  is  a  figure  which  would  be  realised  by  ascribing 
to  them  the  same  seat  of  empire,  to  the  dominions  of  which 
each  makes  his  contribution.  The  seat  of  empire  in  common 
to  them  would  be  that  possessed  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  namely 
Babylon.  Cyrus  and  Alexander  the  Great  would  in  this  way 
fulfil  the  second  and  third  parts.  Daniel's  book  professes  to 
have  been  a  production  of  the  time  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  but  it 
bears  internal  marks  of  being  of  the  period  of  the  Greek  em- 
pire. Thus  Cyrus  and  Alexander  had  flourished  when  he 
wrote,  and  could  be  correctly  shadowed  forth  in  the  recorded 
visions.  They  severally  made  Babylon  their  capital,  and  there 
died  when  in  the  zenith  of  their  power  ;  and  each  added  in 
territories,  beyond  those  possessed  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  to  swell 
the  dominions  of  the  common  centre.  The  fifth  individual 
pointed  to  was  evidently  the  Jewish,  or  the  triumphant  Mes- 
siah ;  and  the  fourth,  whose  power  is  subverted  by  him,  should, 
like  the  three  prior  members  of  these  visions,  be  some  indivi- 
dual king  ruling  in  Babylon.  And  here,  evidently,  we  have 
that  "  king  of  Assyria,"  or  "  king  of  Babylon,"  spoken  of  by 
Isaiah  and  Micah  as  to  be  overthrown  in  the  last  days.  The 
visions  would  thus  indicate  Nebuchadnezzar,  Cyrus,  Alexander, 
the  Antichrist,  and  the  Christ,  as  their  component  members. 
The  first  three  were  known  of  to  the  prophet,  the  last  two 
embody  his  conceptions  for  the  futurity.  Rome,  as  a  dominant 
power,  had  not  then  been  developed,  and  Rome,  consequently, 
finds  no  place  in  his  delineations. 

The  Apocalypse  is  in  the  same  vein.     The  great  beasts  of 


224 


PROPHECY. 


PROPHECY. 


225 


Rome  not 
the  subject 
of  pro- 
phecy. 


Daniel  which  "  came  up  from  the  sea,"  three  of  them,  (those 
known  to  the  writer,)  bearing  the  forms  of  a  lion,  a  bear,  and 
a  leopard,  and  the  fourth,  (unknown  to  him,)  described  in 
vague  terms,  without  special  form,  as  "  dreadful  and  terrible, 
and  strong  exceedingly,"  and  possessing  ten  horns,  are  matched 
by  the  apocalyptic  beast,  representing  the  last  of  the  four. 
He,  in  like  manner,  is  seen  to  "  rise  up  out  of  the  sea,"  em- 
bodied as  a  leopard,  a  bear,  and  a  lion,  in  combination  together, 
and  armed  also  with  ten  horns.  This  beast  is  destroyed  by  the 
"  Lamb,"  "  the  Lord  of  lords,  and  King  o>f  kings;"  wherein, 
again,  we  have  the  last  conflict  between  the  Antichrist  and 
Christ.  The  city  Babylon  at  this  time  also  falls  under  judg- 
ment. 

Now  to  apply  these  prophecies  to  Rome,  Pagan  and  Popish, 
it  is  necessary  thereto  that  Rome  should  fill  the  scene  from 
the  cessation  of  the  Grecian  rule  to  the  last  days.  But  has 
this  been  so  ?  Has  not  Rome  long  been  the  weakest  of  the 
existing  states  ?  Has  not  the  Papal  sovereignty  been  a  mock- 
ery even  to  all  over  whom  it  has  pretended  to  hold  sway  ? 
And  has  not  the  sceptre,  in  these  very  days,  weak  and  unreal 
as  was  the  power  attaching  thereto,  been  taken,,  without  a 
struggle,  out  of  the  feeble  hands  that  held  it  ? 

The  assertion  that  Rome  fulfils  the  prophecy,  will^  in  fact,  in 
no  respect  stand  examination. 

(1).  There  is  no  connection  between  Rome  and  Babylon,  as 
is  necessary  to  bring  her  into  combination  with  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, the  king  of  Babylon,  as  a  constituent  of  the  great 
image,  of  which  he  was  the  revealed  head.  What  is  there  in 
common  between  a  throne  in  Babylon,  and  a  senate,  a  throne, 
or  a  priestly  convocation  in  Rome  ? 

(2).  Four  members  of  the  visions,  namely  the  first  three 
and  the  triumphant  fifth,  are  individuals.  Can  the  remaining 
one  be  properly  represented  by  d3masties  or  chains  of  rulers, — 
consuls,  tribunes,  triumvirs,  emperors,  and  popes,  holding  power 
at  one  time  in  a  republic,  at  another  in  an  oligarchy,  a  mon- 
archy, or  a  hierarchy  1 

(3).  In  the  last  days  it  is  "  the  Assyrian,"  "  the  king  of 
Babylon,"  found  dominant,  who  is  destroyed  at  the  coming  of 
the  Messiah,  and  it  is  his  capital,  "  Babylon,"  that  at  the  same 
time  is  brought  under  judgment.      This  is  not  Rome;   nor  are 


we  at  liberty  to   introduce  a  double  action,  in  two  different 
directions,  so  as  to  include  Rome  in  this  special  judgment. 

(4).  Daniel  has  a  vision  of  a  contest  between  a  ram  and  a 
he-goat,  which  are  said  to  represent  the  kings  of  Media  and 
Persia  on  the  one  side,  and  ''the  king  of  Grecia"  on  the  other. 
The  empire  of  the  latter  is  broken  up  into  four  parts,  and  "out 
of  one  of  them  came  forth  a  little  horn,"  wliich  "waxed  great, 
even  to  the  host  of  heaven."  This  means,  we  are  told,  that 
"  in  the  latter  time  of  their  kingdom,"  that  is  of  the  divided 
empire  of  "  the  king  of  Grecia,"  "  when  the  transgressors  are 
come  to  the  full,  a  king  of  fierce  countenance"  shall  appear, 
who  "  shall  stand  up  against  the  Prince  of  princes ;  but  he 
shall  be  broken  without  hand."  Here,  again,  we  Ippear  to 
have  the  Antichrist,  as  overthrown,  in  the  last  days,  "  when 
the  transgressors  are  come  to  the  full,"  by  the  "  Lamb,"  the 
"  Lord  of  lords,  and  King  of  kings."  But  out  of  any  fragment 
of  the  empire  of  Alexander,  the  Roman  state  cannot  be  de- 
rived.     "  The  Assyrian"  would  be  so. 

(5).  The  fourth  beast  of  Daniel,  represented  to  be  "  dreadful 
and  terrible,"  is  said  to  "  devour,"  and  "  break  in  pieces,"  and 
"stamp"  down  all  other  powers.  Such  was  not  the  manner  of 
the  Roman  empire,  whose  policy  was  to  protect,  build  up,  con- 
solidate, and  incorporate  with  herself,  the  territories  and  peoples 
she  made  her  own  by  conquest.  Nor  is  this  feature  of  destruc- 
tiveness  a  characteristic  of  the  Popish  state,  the  hierarch  seek- 
ing to  cherish  and  gather  in  to  his  fold  all  those  whom  he  can 
control  or  influence.  If  the  head  of  this  state  has  the  will  to 
persecute,  the  power  to  do  so  has  long  ago  passed  away  from 
him.  Nor  would  such  persecution  as  the  Popes  have  been 
capable  of,  amount  to  the  wide  spread,  indiscriminate,  savage 
destructiveness,  descriptive  of  the  beast. 

(6).  The  apocalyptic  beast  is  seen  to  "rise  up  out  of  the 
sea"  as  one  of  the  objects  revealed  to  the  writer  among  the 
"things"  which  were  to  be  "hereafter."  But  Rome,  when 
this  work  was  written,  was  in  the  plenitude  of  her  power,  her 
uprising  being  a  thing  of  the  past,  and  thus  not  what  he  could 
have  been  describing  as  still  future  to  him. 

(7).  The  fourth,  or  apocalyptic  beast,  is  found  in  the  exer-' 
cise  of  his  terrific  powers  at  the  coming  of  the  Messiah,  and  by 
him  is  overthrown,  but  the  Roman  state  was  disposed  of  by 


226 


PROPHECY. 


PROPHECY. 


227 


invasion  of  barbarous  races  more  than  thirteen  centuries  ago, 
and  the  Romish  hierarch,  long  enfeebled,  has  now  been  deprived 
of  the  very  semblance  of  power. 

(8).  Rome,  however,  is  supposed  to  be  represented  by  ten 
inferior  states  springing  ont  of  the  ruins  of  her  empire.  Tliis 
does  not  correspond  with  the  description  of  the  beast.  His 
horns  are  a  part  of  himself,  existing  as  types  of  power  while  he 
is  in  his  entirety,  and  not  representing  fragments  taken  from 
him  on  his  empire  being  broken  up.  Nor  are  the  interpreters 
able  to  point  to  exactly  ten  such  fragments  as  composing  the 
Roman  state  before  her  demolition.  They  vary  in  their  speci- 
fications, naming,  among  them,  Ostragoths,  Visigoths,  Sueves, 
Alans,  Vandals,  Franks,  Burgundians,  Heruli  and  Turingi, 
Saxons,  Britons,  Hans,  Lombards,  Alemanes,  Greeks  ;  fourteen 
divisions,  not  merely  ten.  Nor  did  this  distribution  endure. 
Among  the  Germans,  Italians,  and  Swiss,  a  multiplicity  of 
petty  states  sprang  up,  which  raised  the  number  of  the  horns 
at  one  time  to  from  sixty  to  seventy.  And  in  accounting  for 
the  Roman  domains,  the  interpreters  overlook  the  possessions 
held  by  this  power  in  Asia  Minor,  Syria,  Egypt,  Mesopotamia, 
Media,  and  Armenia. 

(9).  Confining  our  view  to  papal  Rome,  as  representing  the 
power  of  the  Antichrist  which  is  to  be  overthrown  at  the  coming 
of  the  Messiah,  the  individuality  of  the  Antichrist  is  forfeited, 
and  a  system  is  made  to  stand  for  a  man.  Nor  does  this 
system  comprehend  all  that  belongs  to  the  antichristian  body. 
The  Greek  church  is  as  far  removed  from  the  Protestant  sense 
of  orthodoxy  as  the  church  of  Rome,  and  the  Mahometan  faith 
is  even  more  marked  than  eitlier  of  these  with  the  direct  hosti- 
lity to  Christ,  as  revealed  in  the  scripture,  which  characterizes 
the  Antichrist. 

The  ultimate  result  is  that  in  no  ^vay  can  it  be  shown 
that  these  predictions  in  Daniel  and  the  Apocalypse  are  true 
prophetic  utterances  susceptible  of  proof  of  fulfilment.  The 
writers,  evidently,  looked  for  a  speedy  enactment  of  the  catas- 
trophe that  was  to  conclude  all  earthly  interests  in  the  advent 
of  the  Messiah,  and  shaped  their  agents  out  of  the  materials 
surrounding  them.  They  had  no  foreknowledge  of  the  long 
chain  of  events,  with  the  uprise  and  downfall  of  a  multiplicity 
of  independent  states,  which  were  to  occupy  the  field  of  their 


vaticinations,  for  successive  ages,  between  the  times  in  which 
they  stood,  and  the  still  unenacted  end.  They  therefore 
travelled  not,  as  modern  experience  would  require,  to  Rome 
and  onwards,  but  the  early  writ-ers  kept  round  tliat  centre  of 
power  of  which  they  knew,  namely  Babylon,  and  the  author  of 
the  Apocalypse,  treading  in  their  steps,  advanced  no  further. 
Rome,  consequently,  has  had  no  place  in  prophecy. 

We  pass  now  to  the  range  of  prophecies  relating  to  the  Tiie 
coming  of  the  Messiah  and  his  operations.  The  Christians  ^J.^'^fiecf 
allege  that  they  have  been  fulfilled  in  the  person  of  Jesus. 
The  Jews  reject  this  belief,  and  say  that  their  Messiah  has  yet 
to  come.  The  Christians  represent  the  Messiah  in  two  aspects, 
and  with  two  advents,  the  one  as  serving  and  suffering,  the 
other  as  ruHng  and  glorious.  The  Jews  have  not  made  the 
discovery  of  a  two-fold  description  of  the  expected  one  in  the  pro- 
phecies. They  know  of  him  only  as  a  coming  deliverer  and  trium- 
phant king.  There  is  thus,  viewed  from  every  side,  a  measure 
of  prophecy  connected  with  the  Messiah  supposed  to  remain 
still  unfulfilled.  The  Christians,  however,  greatly  differ  among 
themselves  as  to  the  scope  of  the  expected  fulfilment.  One 
party  look  for  an  actual  reign  of  the  Messiah  on  earth,  coupled 
with  the  restoration  of  the  Jewish  nation.  This  falls  in  with 
the  Jewish  anticipations.  The  other  confine  their  hopes  to 
spiritual  and  heavenly  blessing,  in  association,  in  some  way,  with 
their  Redeemer.  In  this  latter  creed  the  field  for  the  offices 
of  a  triumphant  Messiah  is  not  apparent.  When  the  dispensa- 
tions are  wound  up,  and  God  becomes  ''  all  in  all "  (1  Cor.  xv. 
28),  what  scope  is  there  for  other  intervention  ?  what  more 
can  be  required  ? 

The  prophecies  we  have  now  to  deal  with  regard  the  Messiah 
in  his  suffering  aspect,  and  which  the  Christians  maintain  have 
received  their  accomplishment  in  the  life  of  Jesus. 

The  advent  of  the  Messiah  is  associated  with  promises  made  Messiah 
to  Abraham  and  to  David,  and  the  whole  body  of  the  scripture  announced 

by  Mostis. 

is  appealed  to  as  proclaiming  the  event.  At  the  birth  of  John, 
his  father  Zacharias,  being  "filled  wath  the  Holy  Ghost,"  "pro- 
phesied "  of  Jesus,  of  whom  John  was  to  be  the  forerunner, 
saying,  "  Blessed  be  the  Lord  God  of  Israel;  for  he  hath  visited 
and  redeemed  his  people,  and  hath  raised  up  an  horn  of  salva- 
tion for  us  in  the  house  of  his  servant  David ;    as  he  S2)ake  by 


228 


PROPHECY. 


the  mouth   of  his  holy  prophets,  which   have  been   since   the 
world  began  ;  that  we  should  be  saved  from  our  enemies,  and 
from  the   hand   of  all  that  hate  us;    to  perform  the   mercy 
promised  to  our  fathers,  and  to  remember  his  holy  covenant ; 
the  oath  which  he  sware  to  our  father  Abraham  that  he  would 
gi-ant  unto  us,  that  we  being  delivered  out  of  the  hand  of  our 
enemies,  might  serve  him  without  fear,  in  holiness  and  righteous- 
ness  before  him,  all  the   days  of  our  life  "  (Luke  i.  67-75). 
"  Search  the  scriptures,"  said  Jesus,  ''  for  in  them  ye  think  ye 
have  eternal  life  :  and  they  are  they  which  testify  of  me. — Had 
ye  believed  Moses,  ye  would  have  believed  me  :  for  he  wrote  of 
me"  (John  v.  39,  46).      He  spoke  in  the  same  strain  to  two 
of  the  disciples  whom  he  met  Avith  after  his  resurrection  at 
Emmaus,    "0  fools,"  he  said,  ''  and  slow  of  heart  to  believe  all 
that  the  prophots  have  spoken  :  ought  not  Christ  to  have  suf- 
fered these  things,  and  to  enter  into  his  glory?    And  beginning 
at  Moses  and  all  the  prophets,  he  expounded  unto  them  in  all 
the  scriptures  the  things  concerning  himself"  (Luke  xxiv.  25- 
27).      And    afterwards,    appearing  to    the    apostles,   he  said, 
"  These  are  the  words  which  I  spake  unto  you,  while  I  was  yet 
with  you,  that  all  things  must  be  fulfilled  which  were  written 
in  the  law  of  Moses,  and  in  the  prophets,  and  in  the  psalms, 
concerning  me.     Then   opened  he  their  understanding,  that 
they  might  understand  the  scriptures"    (Luke  xxiv.  44,  45). 
And  so  Paul  declared  that  he  had   said   ''  none  other  things 
than  those  which  the  prophets  and  Moses  did  say  should  come: 
that  Christ  should  suffer,  and  that  he  should  be  the  first  that 
should  rise  from  the  dead,  and  should  show  light  unto  the 
people,  and  to  the  Gentiles"  (Acts  xxvi.  22,  23). 

Before  passing  to  the  detailed  prophecies,  there  are  a  few 
observations  to  be  made  on  the  general  declarations  above 
cited.  'The  Messiah  spoken  of  by  Zacharias,  in  the  power  of 
the  Holy  Ghost,  was  clearly  the  temporal  and  triumphant  ruler 
expected  by  the  Jews,  and  not  the  suffering  Messiah,  as  repre- 
sented in  Jesus,  who  was  the  actual  subject  of  his  "prophesying." 
He  ''  blessed  the  Lord,"  as  the  ''  God  of  Israel,"  then  visiting 
"  his  people,"  the  object  of  the  visitation  being  to  set  up  the 
"  horn  "  of  David,  for  their  deliverance  "  from  the  hand  of  all 
who  hated  them,"  in  order  that  they  might  "  serve  him  with- 
out fear,"  in  righteousness,  "all  the  days  of  their  lives."     It 


PROPHECY. 


229 


was  for  earthly  and  national  benefits  that  he  looked  through 
the  then  coming  Messiah,  and  such  he  declared  to  be  the 
scope  and  field  of  his  mission  as  prophetically  announced  from 
the  foundation  of  the  world.  But  this  role  was  not  fulfilled 
by  Jesus.  He  effected  nothing  for  the  Jews  as  a  nation.  In- 
stead of  being  delivered  from  their  enemies,  their  enemies  pre- 
vailed ao-ainst  them :  and  instead  of  serving  God  in  holiness 
and  righteousness,  they  stand  disavowed  and  rejected. 

The  appeal  to  the  scriptures,  made  by  Jesus  himself  during 
his  lifetime,  was  to  their  unfolding  him  as  the  source  of  eternal 
life.     The    common    complaint    is   that   the  dispensation    by 
Moses  concerned  this  life  alone,  without  indication  of  a  life  to 
come.       The   promises   and   the   punishments,   in   the   record 
attributed   to  him,  all  relate  to  temporal  circumstances,   and 
but  for  aspirations  of  a  higher  order  appearing  in  the  psalms 
and  writings  of  the  prophets,  raised   after  the  times  of  Moses, 
and  indepelidently  of  anything  put  forward  by  him,  we  might 
have  concluded  that  the  Jews  were  ungoverned  by  any  ex- 
pectations connected  with  a  future  state.      How  Moses,  there- 
fore, is  to  be  looked  upon  as  having  testified  of  the  Messiah  as 
the  source  of  eternal  life,  is  not  apparent.      It  is  declared  that 
after  his  resurrection,  Jesus,  on  more  occasions  than  one,  ex- 
pounded  all   that  had  been    said   of  himself  throughout  the 
scriptures,  "beginning  at  Moses  ;  "  but  not  a  word  of  these  his 
expositions  has  been   handed  down   for  our  edification.      He 
appears  to  attribute  to  Moses  a  foreknowledge  and  revelation 
of  his  sufferings,  and  Paul  apparently  makes  the  same  allega- 
tion, but  not  a  trace  of  such  knowledge  is  to  be  found  m  the 
writings  ascribed  to  Moses. 

(21).    In  passing  sentence  upon  the  serpent  in  the  garden  Brumng 
of  Eden,  God  is  said  to  have  declared,  "  I  will  put  enmity  be-  ^^^^^^,. 
tween  thee  and  the  woman,  and  between  thy  seed  and  her 
seed,  it  shall  bruise  thy  head,  and  thou  shalt  bruise  his  heel 
(Gen   iii    15).      This  is  a  passage  commonly  held  to  point  to 
Jesus  as  the  redeemer  of  mankind,  and  if  he  has  been  pro- 
claimed  ever  "  since  the  world  began,"  here  only  can  we  look 
for  him  in  those  the  earliest  days.      But  to  associate  him  with 
this  passacre,  various  liberties  have  to  be  taken  with  the  text. 
The  serpent  is  no  longer  merely  the  terrestrial  reptile,  but  re- 
presents the  arch-enemy  Satan,  and  what  is  put  forward  as  a 


A  prophet 
like  unto 
Moses. 


230 


PROPHECY. 


mere  judgment  on  a  transgressor,  becomes  so  altered  in  its 
purport  and  bearing  as  to  embrace  and  convey  inexpressibly 
great  and  enduring  blessing  for  one  of  the  guilty  parties, 
namely  the  human  culprits.  And  even  then  the  passage 
and  the  facts  cannot  be  made  to  agree.  The  devil  is  stated  to 
have  been  "  a  murderer  from  the  beginning,"  and  in  his  rela- 
tions to  mankind  is  known  only  as  Satan,  or  the  adversary. 
But  according  to  the  text  now  in  question,  after  being  brought 
on  the  scene  in  Eden,  God  takes  him  and  man  up,  and  says 
that  he  will  put  enmity  between  them,  as  if  hitherto  no  such 
hostile  feeling  prevailed  on  the  part  of  either  of  them.  This 
is  an  operation  on  the  part  of  the  Creator  assuredly  not  plea- 
sant to  contemplate.  And  when  the  two  are  thus  set  against 
each  other,  they  are  to  do  each  other  mischief,  each  in  his  way. 
The  one  is  to  be  attacked  on  the  "  head,"  and  the  other  on 
the  "heel."  The  application,  especially  confining  it  to  the 
instance  of  Jesus,  is  full  of  difficulty.  The  head  being  a  vital 
region,  were  it  to  be  cruslied,  death  or  destruction  might  be 
indicated,  and  thus  the  absolute  overthrow  of  Satan  by  Jesus 
become  prognosticated.  But  the  head  in  question  is  only  to 
be  "  bruised,"  which  certainly  does  not  necessarily  involve 
these  results.  And  how  is  the  bruising  of  the  heel  of  Jesus 
to  be  explained  ?  His  life,  such  as  he  exhibited  it,  was  abso- 
lutely taken,  and  the  result,  in  his  instance,  was  consequently 
greater  than  what  was  predicted.  And  it  is  a  question  between 
whom  the  conflict  was  to  be.  If  between  Jesus  and  Satan,  then 
it  is  between  the  seed  of  the  woman  and  the  serpent  himself; 
whereas,  according  to  the  text,  the  seed  of  the  one  was  to  en- 
gage the  seed  of  the  other.  Taking  the  passage  literally,  the 
human  race  were  to  be  in  hostility  towards  the  serpent  race. 
Taking  it  figuratively,  Jesus  was  to  bruise,  not  Satan  himself, 
but  his  offspring.  After  tampering  with  the  language  of  the 
passage,  it  is  only  by  generalizing,  and  avoiding  all  close  appli- 
cation of  its  particulars,  that  people  persuade  themselves  that 
it  is  a  prefiguration  of  Jesus  acting  in  the  capacity  of  the 
redeemer  of  mankind. 

(22.)  "  For  Moses  truly  said  unto  the  fathers,  A  prophet 
shall  the  Lord  God  raise  up  unto  you  of  your  brethren,  like 
unto  me  ;  him  shall  ye  hear  in  all  things  whatsoever  he  shall 
say  unto  you. — Yea  and  all  the  prophets  from  Samuel  and 


PROPHECY. 


231 


those  that  follow  after,  as  many  as  have  spoken,  have  likewise 
foretold  these  days.— Unto  you  first,  God,  having  raised  up  his 
son  Jesus,  sent   him  to  bless  you"   (Acts  iii.   22-26).     The 
passage  so  applied  to  Jesus  is  as  follows.      "  The  Lord  thy  God 
will  raise  up  unto  thee  a  prophet  from  the  midst  of  thee,  of 
thy  brethren,  like  unto  me  ;  unto  him  ye  shall  hearken  ;  ac- 
cording to  all  that  thou  desiredst  of  the  Lord  thy  God  m  Horeb 
in  the^day  of  the  assembly,  saying.  Let  me  not  hear  agam  the 
voice  of  the  Lord  my  God,  neither  let  me  see  this  great  fire 
any  more,  that  I  die  not.     And  the  Lord  said  unto  me,  They 
have  well  spoken  that  which  they  have  spoken.     I  will  raise 
them  up  a  prophet  from  among  their  brethren,  like  unto  thee, 
and  will  put  my  words  in  his  mouth  ;  and  he  shall  speak  unto 
them  all  that  I  shall  command  him.     And  it   shall  come  to 
pass  tliat  whosoever  will  not  hearken  unto  my  words  which  he 
shall  speak  in  my  name,  I  will  require  it  of  him.     But  the 
prophet  which  .shall  presume  to  speak  a  word  in  my  name, 
which  I  have  not  commanded  him  to  speak,  or  that  shall  speak 
in  the  name  of  other  gods,  even  that  prophet  shall  die."    After 
this  follows  the  rule  for  deciding  between  a  true  and  a  false 
prophet     (Deut.  xviii.  15-22).       Whoever    this    successor   to 
Moses  may  have  been,  it  is  clear  that  Jesus,  taking  him  as 
described,  was  not  the  person.     The   passage   relates   to  the 
time  "  when"  the  Israelites  had  "  come  into  the  land     given 
them  of  God,  and  the  object  immediately  in  view  was  to  keep 
them  clear  of  resort  to  any  "charmer,  or  consulter  with  familiar 
spirits,  or  wizard,  or  necromancer,"  such  as  the  nations  they 
were  to  come  among  dealt  with  (ver.  9-U).     To  point  beyond 
Moses  to  Jesus,  was  to  leave  them  without  the  needed  guid- 
ance for  fifteen  hundred  years.      The  successor  to  Moses  was 
to  be  a  mere  man  like  himself,  one  raised  "  from  the  midst  of 
them  "  "  of  their  brethren  ;"  but  Jesus  is  stated  to  have  been 
born  of  divine  parentage,  to  have  been  sent  from  heaven,  and 
in  fact  to  have  been  a  divinity  himself.     Nor  did  his  career  in 
any  way  resemble  that  of  Moses.      He  was  no  accepted  leader 
of  the  people,  but  without  station  among  them,  or  power.    The 
passage  evWently  refers  to  ordinary  prophets.-to  one  of  a  class; 
whereas  Jesus  stood  alone,  his  office  of  prophet  being  lost  in 
the  superior  attributes  of  a  saviour. 

(23  )  "  He  hath  holpen  his  servant  Israel,  in  remembrance 


232 


PROPHECY. 


The  seed  of  of  his  mercy  ;  as  he  spake  to  our  fathers,  to  Abraham,  and  to 
^^'  his  seed  for  ever. — That  we  should  be  saved  from  our  enemies, 
and  from  the  hand  of  all  that  hate  us  ;  to  perform  the  mercy 
promised  to  our  fathers,  and  to  remember  his  holy  covenant ; 
the  oath  which  he  sware  to  our  father  Abraham,  that  he  would 
grant  unto  us,  that  we  being  delivered  out  of  the  hand  of  our 
enemies  might  serve  him  without  fear,  in  holiness  and  right- 
eousness before  him,  all  the  days  of  our  life."  (Luke  i.  54,  55, 
71-75).  '' Your  father  Abraham,"  declares  Jesus,  "rejoiced 
to  see  my  day;  and  he  saw  it,  and  was  glad."  (John  viii.  50). 
"And  the  scripture,  foreseeing  that  God  would  justify  the  heathen 
through  faith,  preached  before  the  gospel  unto  Abraham,  say- 
ing. In  thee  shall  all  nations  be  blessed."  (Gal.  iii.  8).  "Now 
to  Abraham  and  his  seed  were  the  promises  made.  He  saith 
not,  and  to  seeds,  as  of  many  ;  but  as  of  one,  and  to  thy  seed, 
which  is  Christ"  (Gal.  iii.  16).  Here  are  bold  limitations  of 
the  promises  to  Abraham,  making  them  to  centre  in  the  person 
of  Jesus.  With  what  justice  will  be  seen  by  citing  the  pro- 
mises themselves. 

"Now  the  Lord  had  said  unto  Abram, — I  will  make  of 
thee  a  great  nation,  and  I  will  bless  thee,  and  make  thy  name 
great ;  and  thou  shalt  be  a  blessing  :  and  I  will  bless  them 
that  bless  thee,  and  curse  him  that  curseth  thee  :  and  in  thee 
shall  all  families  of  the  earth  be  blessed."  (Gen.  xii.  2,  3;. 
"  And  the  Lord  appeared  unto  Abram,  and  said,  Unto  thy 
seed  will  I  give  this  land."  (Gen.  xii.  7).  "  For  all  the  land 
which  thou  seest,  to  thee  will  I  give  it,  and  to  thy  seed  for 
ever.  And  I  will  make  thy  seed  as  the  dust  of  the  earth, 
so  that  if  a  man  can  number  the  dust  of  the  earth,  then  shall 
thy  seed  also  be  numbered."  (Gen.  xiii.  15,  IG).  "  This  shall 
not  be  thine  heir,  (referring  evidently  to  Eliezer  his  steward,)  but 
he  that  shall  come  forth  out  of  thine  own  bowels  shall  be  thine 
heir.  And  he  brought  him  forth  abroad,  and  said.  Look  now 
toward  heaven,  and  tell  the  stars,  if  thou  be  able  to  number 
them  :  and  he  said  unto  him.  So  shall  thy  seed  be."  (Gen.  xv. 
4,  5).  "  I  will  make  thee  exceeding  fruitful,  and  I  will  make 
nations  of  thee,  and  kings  shall  come  out  of  thee.  And  I  will 
establish  my  covenant  between  me  and  thee  in  their  genera- 
tions for  an  everlasting  covenant,  to  be  a  God  unto  thee,  and 
to  thy  seed  after  thee.     And  I  will  give  unto  thee,  and  to  thy 


PROPHECY. 


233 


i 


seed  after  thee,  the  land  wherein  thou  art  a  stranger,  all  the 
land  of  Canaan,  for  an  everlasting  possession  ;  and  I  will  be 
their  God."  And  then  follows  the  institution  of  circumcision 
to  mark  and  designate  the  seed.     (Gen.  xvii.  6-14). 

The  prophecy  of  Zacharias,  with  which  this  section  opens, 
relates  altogether  to  the   nation    and  their  temporal  welfare. 
The  "  promise  to  the  fathers,"  the  "  holy  covenant,"  and  the 
"  oath   sworn    to    Abraham,"  involved,  in  his   idea,  no  more. 
The  texts  I   have  cited  from  Genesis  fully  support  this  view. 
The  coming   Messiah,  Jesus,  was   to  be   the    instrument   for 
carrying  out  these  promises.      He  was  to  free  the  nation  from 
the  oppression  of  their  enemies,  and   enable  them  to  "  serve 
God  without  fear,  in  holiness  and   righteousness,  all  the  days 
of  their  lives  ;"  and  the  blessing  assured  to  them  was  to  flow 
onwards  throiigli  them  to   the   Gentiles.      But  no  such    fulfil- 
ment ensued.       Jesus    passed    away,   himself  disposed    of  as 
a  common  criminal  by  those  very  enemies  he  was  to  have 
put  down.      The   nation   remained   under   subjection,   and   as 
wanting  as  ever  in  the  holiness  and  righteousness  that  was  to 
characrerise  them.      No  blessing  has,  of  course,  come  through 
them  to  other  nations.      Thereupon  the  apostolic  commentator 
steps  in  with  an  entirely  new  version  of  the  promises.      They 
relate  no  more  to  the  Jews  as  a  nation,  nor  to  earthly  pros- 
perity.     The  seed    is  Jesus,   and   none  other.      The  blessings 
are  of  a  spiritual  order,  assured  to  all,  indiscriminately,  who 
believe  in  him.      "  If  ye  be  Christ's,  then  are   ye  Abraham's 
seed   and  heirs  according  to  the  promise"  (Gal.  iii.  29).      The 
Gentiles  are  not  recipients  of  blessing  through  the  intermediate 
channel  of  the  Jews.      They  come  in  with  entire  independence 
of  the   natural   seed.      That  seed,  in   common  with   all  flesh 
"  profiteth  nothing  "  (John  vi.  63).      All  centres  in  Jesus,  and 
whoever  lays  hold  of  him,  whether  Jew  or  Gentile,  is  brought 
equally  within  the   "  covenant."      And   the  realization  ot  the 
promises   depends    upon    futurity   and    the    unrevealed    world. 
"  Eye  hath  not  seen,  nor  ear  heard,  neither  have  entered  into 
the' heart    of  man,   the  things  which  God  hath  prepared  for 
them  that  love  him  "  (1  Cor.  ii.  9).      The  process  is  just  this. 
The  things  spoken  of  are  not  the  things  meant,  the  persons 
indicated  are  not  those  designed,  and  when  multitudes  are  m 
question,  a  single  unit  is  intended.      That  seed,  coming,  as  it 


234 


PROPHECY. 


PROPHECY. 


235 


The  throne 
of  David. 


is   said   with   curious    phraseology,    "  out   of  the   bowels "    of 
Abraham,  and  stamped  with  the  visible  token  of  the  ''  cove- 
nant" made  with  him  -  in  the  flesh  "  (Gen.  xvii.  13),  relates 
not  to  a  carnal  but  a  spiritual  progeny,  and  while  described 
to  be  countless  as   -  the  dust  of  the  earth,"  or   "  the  stars  of 
heaven,"  proves  to  be  a  solitary  individual.      He  is  God-born, 
and  therefore  in  no  sense  of  the  seed  of  Abraham.     And,  more 
than  this,  strange  to  say,  the  relative  positions  are  transposed, 
and  this  alleged  ''seed"  becomes,  in  fact,  the  progenitor  of  the 
stock  from   which  it  is  sought  to  derive  him.      If  Abraham 
obtains  admission  into  the  family  of  God,  he  is  brought  in,  as 
any   other,   through   Jesus.       The   gospel,    ''which   was    kept 
secret  since  the  world  begcxn"  (Rom.  xvi.  25),  was,  as  we  have 
seen,  nevertheless   "  preached  "  to  him,  and  he   "  saw  the  day 
of  Jesus,"  in  anticipation,  and  "rejoiced"  in  it.     The  temporal 
promises  made  to  him  signify  the  spiritual  promises  made  to 
us,  of  which  he,  and  others  like  him,  are  joint  recipients  with 
ourselves,  "  God   having  provided  "  that  these,  who  have  "  re- 
ceived "  no  other  "  promise,"  "  without  us  should  not  be  made 
perfect"  (Heb.  xi.    39,  40).      That  "seed,"  which  constitutes 
the   heritage    "according   to   the   promise,"   is  such   only   "if 
Christ's,"  a  condition  as  imperative  in  the  case  of  Abraham  as 
of  ourselves.      "  Before  Abraham  was,"  Jesus  asserted  in  the 
sense  that  the  whole  foundation  was  raised  upon  himself,  "  I 
am"   (John   viii.   58).      The  confusion   therefore    is  complete. 
Abraham  is  the  seed  of  him  who  is  said  to  be  his  seed.      One 
thing  becomes,  in  this  manner,  another  thing,  and  the  certainty 
of  language  is  at  an  end.      But  in  either  way,  whether  the 
promis^'es  to  Abraham  relate  to  a  seed  carnal  or  a  seed  spiritual, 
to  things  of  earth   or  things  of  heaven,  no  fulfihnent  can  be 
claimed.      The  Jews  remain  undelivered  and  unblessed,  and  the 
inheritance  of  the  Christians,  as  such,  has  yet  to  be  reahzed. 

(24.)  "Fear  not  Mary,"  said  the  angel  to  her,  "for  thou 
hast  found  favour  with  God.  And,  behold,  thou  shalt  con- 
ceive in  thy  womb,  and  bring  forth  a  son,  and  shalt  call  his 
name  Jesus.  He  shall  be  great,  and  shall  be  called  the  Son 
of  the  Highest :  and  the  Lord  God  shall  give  unto  him  the 
throne  of  his  father  David  :  and  he  shall  reign  over  the  house 
of  Jacob  for  ever"  (Luke  i.  30-33).  The  wise  men  from  the 
east,  star-guided,  came  inquiring,   "  Where  is  he  that  is  born 


King  of  the  Jews?"      Herod,   made   anxious  by  his  advent, 
aske'd  where  he  was  to  be   born,  and   the    answer  was,    "  In 
Bethlehem  of  Judea  :  for  thus  it  is  written  by  the  prophet, 
and  thou  Bethlehem,  in  the  land  of  Juda,  art  not   the  least 
among  the  princes  of  Juda:  for  out  of  thee  shall  come  a  Gover- 
nor, that  shall  rule  my  people  Israel."     (Matt.  ii.  1-6).      Na- 
thanael    accordingly   so   recognised   him,    saying,    acceptably, 
"  Thou  art  the  Son   of  God ;   thou  art  the   King   of  Israel " 
(John  i.  49).      Jesus  passed  away  without  assuming  the  throne, 
and  it  was  then  represented  that  the  prediction  was  made  good 
in   his  resurrection.      "  David— being  a  prophet,  and  knowing 
that  God  had  sworn  with  an  oath  to  him,  that  of  the  fruit  of 
his  loins,  according  to  the  flesh,  he  would  raise  up  Christ  to 
sit  on  his  throne;  he  seeing  this  before  spake  of  the  resurrec- 
tion of  Christ,  that  his  soul  was  not  left  in  hell,  neither  his 
flesh  did  see  corruption"   (Acts  ii.  30,  31).      ''  Of  this  man's 
seed,"  namely  of  David's,  "  hath  God  according  to  his  promise 
raised  unto  Israel  a  Saviour,  Jesus.— And  we  declare  unto  you 
cxlad  tidings,  how  that  the  promise  which  was  made  unto  the 
fathers,  God  hath  fulfilled  the  same  unto  us  their  children,  m 
that  he  hath  raised  up  Jesus  again  ;  a^  it  is  written  m  the 
second  Psalm,  Thou  art  my  son,  this  day  have  I  begotten  thee. 
And  as  concerning  that  he  raised  him  up  from  the  dead,  now 
no  more  to  return  to  corruption,  he  said  on  this  wise,  I   will 
give  you  the  sure  mercies  of  David"  (Acts  xiii.  23,  32-34.) 
How  such  an  act  can  be  called  a  fulfilment  is  not  apparent. 
He  that  was  to  be  the  Son  of  David,  "  the  fruit  of  his  loins 
according  to  the  flesh,"   was  made  so  by  becoming  the  Son  ot 
God  in  resurrection  life ;   and   he  who  was  to  fill  the   earthly 
throne,  does  so  by  being  translated  to  heaven.      It  requires  a 
strong  power  of  accommodation,    beyond   wliat    I  possess,   to 
brinc^the  prediction  and  the  alleged  event  into  accoicl 

To  pass  to  the  prophecy  itself.  "  I  will  set  up,  David  is 
assured  in  a  passage  I  have  already  cited,  "  thy  seecl  after 
thee  which  shall  proceed  out  of  thy  bowels,  and  I  will  estab- 
lish his  kingdom.  He  shall  build  an  house  for  my  name  and 
I  will  stablish  the  throne  of  his  kingdom  for  ever.  I  will  be 
his  father,  and  he  shall  be  my  son.  If  he  commit  iniquity,  I 
will  chasten  him  with  the  rod  of  men,  and  with  the  stripes  of 
the   children  of  men  :  but  my  mercy  shall  not  depart  away 


236 


PROPHECY. 


from  him,  as  I  took  it  from  Saul,  whom  I  put  away  before 
thee,  and  thine  house  and  thy  kingdom   shall  be  established 
for  ever  before  thee  ;   thy  throne  shall  be  established  for  ever" 
(2  Sam.  vii.  12-lG.)      The  time  for  this  assured  and  insub- 
vertible   dominion    is   that  of  the  final   restoration  of  Israel. 
''  And  there  shall  come  forth,  a  rod   out  of  the  stem  of  Jesse, 
and  a  branch  shall  grow  out  of  his  roots. — In  that  day  there 
shall  be  a  root  of  Jesse,  which  shall  stand  for  an  ensign  of  the 
people  ;  to  it  shall  the  Gentiles  seek  :  and  his   rest  shall    be 
glorious.      And  it  shall  come  to  pass  in  that   day,  that   the 
Lord  shall  set  his  hand  again  the  second  time   to  recover  the 
remnant  of  his  people. — And  he  shall  set  up  an  ensign  for  the 
Dations,  and  shall  assemble  the  outcasts  of  Israel,  and  gather 
together  the  dispersed  of  Judah  from   the  four  corners  of  the 
earth. — And  the  adversaries  of  Judah  shall  be  cut  off"  (Isa.  xi. 
1,  10-13).      "  How  beautiful  upon  the  mountains  are  the  feet 
of  him  that  bringeth  good  tidings,  that  publisheth  peace ;  that 
bringeth    good    tidings    of   good,    that    publisheth  salvation  ; 
that  saith  unto  Zion,   Thy  God  reigneth  !"   (Isa.   lii.  7).      "  I 
will  take  the  children  of  Israel  from  among  the  heathen,  whither 
they  be  gone,  and  will  gather  them  on  every  side,  and  bring 
them  into  their  own  land  :  and  I  will  make  them   one  nation 
in  the  land   upon  the  mountains   of  Israel. — And  David  my 
servant  shall  be  king  over  them  ; — and  they  shall  dwell  in  the 
land  that  I  have  given  unto  Jacob  my  servant,  wherein  your 
fiithers  have  dwelt  : — and  my  servant   David    shall   be    their 
prince  for  ever. — I  will  be  their  God,  and  they  shall  be  my 
people"     (Ezek.    xxxvii.    21-28).       "But    thou    Bethlehem 
Ephratah,  though  thou  be  little  among  the  thousands  of  Judah, 
yet  out  of  thee  shall  he  come  forth  unto  me  that  is  to  be  ruler 
in   Israel ;  whose  goings  forth  have  been  from   of  old,   from 
everlasting.      Therefore  will  he  give  them  up,  until  the  time 
that  she  which  travaileth  hath  brought  forth  :  then  the  rem- 
nant of  his  brethren  shall   return  unto  the  children  of  Israel. 
And  he  shall  stand  and  feed  in  the  strength   of  the   Lord,   in 
the  majesty  of  the  name  of  the  Lord  his  God  ;  and  they  shall 
abide  :  for  now  shall  he  be  great  unto  the  ends  of  the  earth. 
And  this  man  shall  be  the  peace,  when  the  Assyrian  shall  come 
unto  our  land  ;  and  when  he  shall  tread  in  our  palaces. — And 
they  shall  waste  the  land  of  Assyria  with  the  sword,  and  the 


PROPHECY. 


237 


land  of  Nimrod  in  the  entrances  thereof :  thus  shall  he  deliver 
us  from  the  Assyrian,  when  he  cometh  into  our  land,  and  when 
he  treadeth  within  our  borders.      And  the  remnant  of  Jacob 
shall  be  in  the  midst  of  many  people  as  a  dew  from  the  Lord, 
as  the  showers  upon  the  grass,  that  tarrieth  not  for  man,  nor 
waiteth  for  the  sons  of  men.      And  the  remnant  of  Jacob  shall 
be  among  the  Gentiles  in  the  midst  of  many  people  as  a  lion 
amoncT  the  beasts  of  the  forest,  as  a  young  lion  among  the 
flocks^of  sheep ;  who,  if  he  go  through,  both  treadeth  down, 
and  teareth  in  pieces,  and  none  can  deliver.— And  I  will  exe- 
cute vengeance  in  anger  and  fury  upon  the  heathen,  such  as 
they  have  not  heard  "   (Mic.  v.  2-15).      "  Why  do  the  heathen 
rage,  and  the  people  imagine  a  vain  thing  ?      The  kings  of  the 
earth   set  themselves,  and    the  rulers  take  counsel  togetlier, 
against  the  Lord,  and  against  his  anointed.— Yet  have  I  set 
my  kincr  upon  my  holy  hill  of  Zion.     I  will  declare  the  decree : 
the  Lord  hath  said  unto  me,  Thou  art  my  Son  ;  this  day  have 
I  begotten  thee.      Ask  of  me,  and  I  shall  give  thee  the  heathen 
for  thine  inheritance,  and  the  uttermost  parts  of  the  earth  for 
thy  possession.      Thou   shalt  break  them  with  a  rod  of  iron  ; 
thou  shalt  dash  them  in  pieces  like  a  potter's  vessel      (Ps.  ii. 
1  12)       "  And  I  will  shake  all  nations,  and  the  desire  of  all 
nations  shall  come  :  and  I  will  fill  this  house  with  glory,  s^ith 
the  Lord  of  hosts.  -And  in  this  place  will  I  give  peace  "   (Hag. 
ii   7-9)       ''  The    Lord   hath  sworn  in  truth  unto  David  ;  he 
will  not  turn  from  it  ;  of  the  fruit  of  thy  body  will  I  set  upon 
thy  throne     If  thy  children  will  keep  my  covenant  and  my  tes- 
timony that  I  shall  teach  them,  their  children  shall  also  sit  upon 
thy  throne  for  evermore.      For  the  Lord  hath  chosen  Zion; 
he  hath  desired  it  for  his  habitation.      This  is  my  rest  for  ever: 
here  will  I  dwell ;   for  I  have  desired  it.— I  will   also  clothe 
her  priests  with  salvation  ;  and  her  saints  shall  shout  aloud  for 
ioy      There  will  I  make  the  horn  of  David   to  l>ud  :  I  have 
ordained  a  lamp  for  mine  anointed.      His  enemies  will  I  clothe 
with  shame  ;  but  upon  himself  shall  his  crown  flourish      (Ps. 

CXXxii.    11-18).  .J     Dpsnent 

In  the  gospels  Jesus  is  presented  to  us  as  tins  promised  De-"* 
descendant  from  David.     He  was  announced  as  such  by  the  D.,id. 
angel  to  Mary  his  mother  ;  he  wa^  addressed  as  such  by  per- 
sons seeking  help  from  him  in  their  infirmities ;  and  wa.  thus 


23cS 


PROPHECY. 


PROPHECY. 


239 


accepted  by  the  populace  (Matt.  xii.  23)  ;  and  so  proclaimed 
on  his  public  entry  into  Jerusalem  (Matt.  xxi.  9).  And 
Paul  so  describes  him,  distinguishing  between  his  natural  birth 
and  whatever  was  to  be  attributed  to  him  in  his  resurrection 
life,  saying,  "  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord,  which  was  made  of  the 
seed  of  David  according  to  the  flesh  ;  and  declared  to  be  the 
Son  of  God  with  power,  according  to  the  spirit  of  holiness,  by 
the  resurrection  from  the  dead."  (Rom.  i.  3,  4). 
•  The  attempt  to  connect  Jesus  with  David  is  made  through 
the  channel  of  Joseph.  In  the  mention  of  Mary's  marriage 
to  him,  Joseph  is  carefully  pointed  out  to  be  "  of  the  house  of 
David  "  (Luke  i.  27),  and  when  an  angel  appears  to  him  in  a 
dream  to  explain  to  him  how  his  virgin  wife  proved  to  be  with 
child,  he  is  addressed  as  "  Joseph,  thou  son  of  David  "  (Matt, 
i.  20)  ;  added  to  which  there  are  two  genealogies  given  tracing 
him  in  a  direct  line  to  David.  But  when  we  turn  to  the  fact 
of  the  origin  of  Jesus,  this  feature  disappears.  He  is  distinctly 
declared  to  have  been  begotten  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  Joseph 
having  no  part  in  him  ;  and  when  the  matter  is  discussed  by 
Jesus  himself,  he  obviously  points  to  his  superior  or  divine 
parentage.  He  puts  it  to  the  Pharisees,  "  What  think  ye  of 
Christ  ?  whose  son  is  he  ?  They  say  unto  him,  The  son  of 
David.  He  saith  unto  them.  How  then  doth  David  in  spirit 
call  him  Lord,  saying.  The  Lord  said  unto  my  Lord,  Sit  thou 
on  my  right  hand,  till  I  make  thine  enemies  thy  footstool  ? 
If  David  then  call  him  Lord,  how  is  he  his  son  ?"  (Matt.  xxii. 
42-45).  His  only  human  link  was  Mary.  Her  tribe  is  not 
mentioned,  but  being  the  cousin  of  Elizabeth,  who  was  the 
wife  of  a  priest  and  herself  of  Aaronic  descent  (Luke  i.  5,  36), 
she  must  have  been  of  Levi.  The  parentage,  moreover,  should 
be  traceable  through  the  father,  and  not  through  the  mother. 

We  see  then  the  necessity  that  the  Messiah  should  be  of 
the  stock  of  David,  "  the  fruit  of  his  loins  "  as  it  is  stated,  and 
that  Jesus,  however  addressed,  was  not  of  that  stock.  Also 
that  he  was  to  be  a  mere  human  being,  subject  to  ''  commit 
iniquity,"  and  -when  transgressing  to  be  "  chastened,"  as  a 
man,  ''with  the  rod  of  men;"  whereas  Jesus  was  God-born 
and  "without  sin."  (Heb.  iv.  15).  We  further  see  that  he 
was  to  be  the  king  of  Israel,  upon  the  throne  of  David,  putting 
down    his  enemies,    and   prominently   the   long  extinguished 


Assyrian,  and  that  the  time  of  this  reign  was  to  be  that  of  the 
re-establishment  of  the  Jewish  nation, — features  not  realized 
in  Jesus,  and  still  unaccomplished.  And  if  the  facts  are  to 
be  explained  away  by  the  process  of  spiritualizing  them,  if  the 
descent  from  David  is  ideal  and  figurative,  and  the  throne,  the 
enemies,  and  renovated  Israel,  are  to  have  a  spiritual  accepta- 
tion, why  the  painful  struggle  to  associate  Jesus  with  the 
literal  facts  by  means  of  Joseph's  genealogies  and  the  birth- 
place in  Bethlehem  ? 

(25.)  There  are  clauses  which  certainly fjxvour  the  idea  that  the  Divinity  of 
Messiah  was  to  be  of  divine  origin,  where  it  is  said  unto  Zion,  ^^^  ''^' 
*'  Thy  God  reigneth,"  and  that  he  was  one  "  whose  goings 
forth  have  been  from  of  old,  from  everlasting."  But  these 
plirases,  if  such  be  their  meaning,  militate  against  the  others 
that  describe  a  human  ruler  ;  nor  do  they  help  out  the  appli- 
cation of  these  prophecies  to  Jesus.  Neither  his  god-head, 
nor  his  rule,  have  been  visibly  manifested,  nor  do  we  know 
anything  of  his  "  goings  forth  "  from  eternity.  Dr  Davidson's 
rendering  of  this  latter  passage  is,  "  His  origin  is  from  of  old, 
from  the  days  of  ancient  time,  i.e.,  his  descent  is  from  the  very 
ancient  house  of  David.  Eternity  is  not  here  in  the  phrase." 
"What  Jewish  writer  under  the  Old  Testament,"  he  adds, 
"  ever  thought  that  Messiah  was  truly  and  literally  divine,  or 
that  his  birth-place  was  eternity  ?      None."  ^ 

There  is  another  passage  of  the  like  character  which  is  com- 
monly applied  to  the  Messiali.  "  For  unto  us  a  child  is  born, 
unto  us  a  son  is  given,  and  the  government  shall  be  upon  his 
shoulders  :  and  his  name  shall  be  called  Wonderful,  Counsellor, 
The  mighty  God,  The  everlasting  Father,  The  Prince  of  Peace. 
Of  the  increase  of  his  government  and  peace  there  shall  be  no 
end,  upon  the  throne  of  David,  and  upon  his  kingdom,  to  order 
it,  and  to  establish  it  with  judgment  and  with  justice  from 
henceforth  even  for  ever."  (Isa.  ix.  G,  7).  The  rendering  of 
these  appellations  from  the  original  is  much  called  in  question. 
Dr  Rowland  Williams  gives  the  translation  "  Wonderful,  Coun- 
sellor, Mighty  Hero,  Father  of  the  age.  Prince  of  Peace,"^  and 
tells  us  that  Luther's  translation  of  the  chief  term,  El  Gibbor, 
was    like   his,    Might,   Hero.^     Dr  Adler,    a  minister  among 

1  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament,  III.  290.       »  Hebrew  Prophets,  273. 
3  Introduction  to  Dasprez's  Daniel,  Ixii.  Ixxi. 


240 


PROPHECY. 


the  Jews,  gives  the  same  translation,^  and  he  and  Dr  Williams 
point  out  that  in  other  places  in  the  scripture  the  phrase  is 
applied  to  Nimrod,  Nebucliadnezzar,  Alexander,  the  men  of 
Moab,  &c.  But  however  rendered,  the  passage  cannot  be 
accepted  as  applying  to  Jesus  until  he  may  be  exhibited  "  upon 
the  throne  of  David." 

In  the  Christian  scriptures,  attempts  are  made  to  support 
the  pretensions  of  Jesus  to  a  divine  parentage  by  means  of  the 
older  records.      These  I  proceed  to  notice. 

"  While  the  Pharisees  were  gathered  together,  Jesus  asked 
them,  saying.  What  think  ye  of  Christ  ?     Whose   son   is   he  ? 
They  say  unto  him.  The  son  of  David.      He  saith  unto  them, 
How  then  doth   David   in  spirit  call  him  Lord,   saying.  The 
Lord  said  unto   my  Lord,  sit   thou   on   my   right  hand,  till  I 
make  thine  enemies  thy  footstool  ?      If  David  then  call  him 
Lord,  how  is  he  his  son?"   (Matt.    xxii.    41-45).      The  refer- 
ence is  to  the  110th  psalm.      The  object  was  to  show  thereby 
that  the  Messiah  was  spoken  of  by  David  as  his  ''  Lord,"  and 
therefore  could  not  be  his  son,  or  descendant,  upon  which   the 
inference  was  to  be  raised  of  Christ's  superiority  to  David  in 
his  origin,  so  claiming  for  him  a  divine  origin.      If  this  be  the 
true  import  of  the  phrase,  it  is  singular  that   so   weighty  a 
doctrine  should  be  left  to  be  discovered  by  a   mere   inference. 
"  The  Davidic  authorship  of  the  psalm,"    says  Dr  Davidson, 
"  cannot  be  sustained ;  some  contemporary  poet  addressed  it  to 
him,  on  the  basis  of  a  divine   oracle  which   the   monarch    had 
received    as   he   was   setting    out    on    a    warlike    expedition. 
*  Jehovah  said  to  my  lord/  i.e.,  to  the  poet's  sovereign."  ^     In 
the  Hebrew,  distinct  terms  are  used  for  those  who  are  repre- 
sented by  the  word  ''  Lord  "  in  the  English  translation,  as  if 
both  were  of  like  degree,  divine  beings.     There  it  is  "  Jehovah 
said   to   my   adonai,"    the    first    divine   and    the    second    here 
obviously  human.     And  if  the  Messiah  was  in   truth  the  per- 
sonage spoken  of  as  addressed,  then  Jesus  did  not  occupy  the 
position  described.      The  subject  of  the  psalmist  is  one  who  is 
to  trample  upon  his  enemies  and  to  put  forth  "  the  rod  of  his 
strenoth  out  of  Zion."     It  is  the  Jewish  warlike  Messiah  who 
is  here  depicted,  not  the  humble  and  suffering  Jesus. 

1  Sermons  (on  the  alleged  Messianic  Prophecies),  23. 

2  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament,  II.  285. 


PROPHECY. 


241 


"  For  unto  which  of  the  angels  said  he  at  any  time.  Thou 
art  my  son,  this  day  have  I  begotten  thee  ?  And  again,  I 
will  be  a  Father,  and  he  shall  be  to  me  a  son  ?  And  again, 
when  he  bringeth  in  the  first  begotten  into  the  world,  he  saith, 
And  let  all  the  angels  of  God  worship  him. — But  unto  the 
son  he  saith,  Thy  throne,  O  God,  is  for  ever  and  ever  "  (Heb. 
i.  5-8).  Several  passages  are  here  appealed  to  as  establishing 
the  divinity  of  Jesus,  namely  Ps.  ii.  7  ;  Ixxxix.  26,  27  ;  xlv. 
<),  7.  The  first  of  these  relates  to  the  martial  "  king  '* 
established  upon  the  ''holy  hill  of  Zion."  This  was  not 
Jesus.  The  second  passage  relates  also  to  a  warrior  king 
whose  "  foes  "  were  to  be  *'  beaten  down  before  his  face." 
This  is  apparently  David  himself.  In  neither  instance  does 
the  sonship  to  God  imply  of  necessity  more  than  belongs  to  all 
who  own  his  fatherly  care.  In  the  last  passage  there  is 
nothing  pointing  to  any  one  who  may  be  called  "  the  first- 
begotten  into  the  world,"  or  in  fact  to  the  "  bringing  in  "  of 
any  one.  It  is  a  phrase  introduced  by  the  apostle  to  sustain 
his  representations  elsewhere  that  Jesus  was  such  a  first-born 
(CoL  i.  15,  18),  The  person  in  question  in  the  psalm  is 
a^ain  a  martial  monarch  whose  "  sword  "  and  "  arrows  "  are 
brought  to  view.  "  The  sixth  verse,"  observes  Dr  Davidson 
of  the  passage  as  it  stands  in  the  psalm,  ''  which  is  rendered, 
Thv  throne,  O  God,  is  for  ever  and  ever,  should  be  translated, 
*  thy  God's  throne,  i.e.,  thy  throne  given  and  protected  by 
God,  is  for  ever  and  ever.'  "  ^ 

'*  As  he  saith  also  in  another  place.  Thou  art  a  priest  for  ever, 
after  the  order  of  Melchisedec"  (Heb.  v.  6).  This  involves  a 
resemblance  to  one,  respecting  whom  the  statement  of  the 
apostle  is,  that  he  was  "  without  father,  without  mother,  with- 
out descent,  having  neither  beginning  of  days,  nor  end  of  life" 
(Heb.  vi.  3);  a  being,  in  effect,  with  the  attributes  of  the 
eternal  God.  Where  the  apostle  got  his  marvellous  informa- 
tion concerning  Melchisedec  is  not  apparent.  Jesus,  at  all 
events,  had  a  mother,  whatever  may  be  said  of  his  parentage 
on  the  father's  side,  and  the  parallel  so  far  does  not  hold  good. 
The  apostle's  reference  is  to  the  110th  Psalm,  which,  as  already 
pointed  out,  relates  to  a  warlike  personage  ruling  in  Zion. 

1  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament,  II.,  283. 


242 


PROPHECY. 


1/ 


The 
seventy 
weeks  of 
DameL 


(26.)  Seventy  weeks,  Daniel  was  informed  tlirough  an  angel, 
were  appointed  to  bring  to  an  end  the  dispensation  for  his 
people  and  city.  "  Know  therefore,"  it  was  said  to  him,  ''and 
understand  that  from  the  going  forth  of  the  commandment  to 
restore  and  to  build  Jerusalem  unto  Messiah  the  Prince  shall 
be  seven  weeks,  and  threescore  and  two  weeks  :  the  street 
shall  be  built  again,  and  the  wall,  even  in  troublous  times. 
And  after  threescore  and  two  weeks  shall  Messiah  be  cut  off, 
but  not  for  himself"  (Dan.  ix.  24-26). 

The  term  ''Messiah  the  Prince,"  Dr  Adler  gives  as  "the 
anointed  prince."^     Mr  Desprez  points  out  that  the  definite 
article  is  not  used  in  the  original,  and  that  the  phrase  should 
be  "an  anointed,  a  prince," ^  so  that  it  is  not  indisputably  clear 
that  the  Messiah  is  here  intended,  though  the  presumption,  from 
the  tenor  of  the  prophecy,  which  embraces  the  consummation 
of  God's  dealings  with  the  Jews,  is  that  he  is  the  prince  pointed 
to.    Jesus,  however,  has  not  fulfilled  the  exigencies  of  the  desig- 
nation.     "My  kingdom,"   he  said,    "is    not  of   this   world" 
(John  xviii.  36);  and  he  presents  himself  not  as  a  prince,  a 
dignity   and  position  he  neither  emulated  nor   attained,   but 
"humbled  himself"  and  "took  upon  him  the  form  of  a  servant" 
(Phil.  ii.  7,  8).      Nor   was  he  ever   anointed.      Hengstenberg 
assumes  that  when  Jesus  was  recognized  at  his  baptism  by  the 
descent  upon  him  of  the  dove,  and  by  the  voice  from  heaven, 
this  was  "  his  consecration  as  Messiah   by  the   anointing  from 
above,"^  but  he  is  not  supported  by  any  statement  to  such  effect 
in  the  gospel  narratives,  and  baptism,  and  the  anointment  of 
a  crowned  head,  are  two  very  different  things. 

The  term  of  the  seventy  weeks,  or  four  hundred  and  ninety 
years,  is  divided  into  three  periods  of  seven,  sixty-two,  and 
one  week,  representing  respectively  forty-nine,  four  hundred 
and  thirty-four,  and  seven  years.  The  events  associated  with 
these  periods  are  the  restoration  of  Jerusalem,  the  appearance 
of  the  anointed  prince,  such  an  one  being  cut  off,  and  the 
events  of  the  last  week,  which,  being  subsequent  to  the  cutting 
off  of  the  prince,  need  not  be  entered  upon.  The  rebuilding 
of  Jerusalem,  "  the  street  "  and  "  the  wall  "  "  in  troublous 
times,"   introduced    in    the    text    after    the    second   of    these 

1  Adler's  Sermons,  107.  ^  Desprez's  Daniel,  177. 

9  Christology  of  Old  Testament,  111.  137. 


PROPHECY. 


243 


periods,  is  commonly  placed  by  interpreters  between  the  first 
and  second  periods.  This  is  Hengstenberg's  method.^  There 
is  nothing  in  the  text  to  warrant  such  a  liberty.  The  arrange-, 
ment  is  evidently  suggested  by  the  desire  to  find  an  event  for 
the  first  period,  and  to  free  the  text  from  the  representation 
that  the  renovation  of  the  city  was  to  be  the  work  of  several 
hundred  years.  Dr  Adler's  rendering  removes  the  opening 
for  such  a  treatment  of  the  passage.  "  Know,  therefore,  and 
understand  that  from  the  going  forth  of  the  word  to  restore 
and  to  build  Jerusalem  unto  the  anointed  prince,  shall  b^ 
seven  weeks,  and  during  threescore  and  two  weeks  the  market- 
place and  the  ditch  shall  again  be  built  even  in  troublous 
times.  And  after  the  threescore  and  two  weeks  an  anointe4 
shall  be  cut  off."  According  to  this  an  anointed  prince  was  to 
appear  at  the  close  of  the  first  period,  the  rebuilding  of  Jeru- 
salem was  to  be  effected  in  the  course  of  the  second,  and  then 
another  anointed  personage  was  to  be  cut  off.  To  add  the 
seven  weeks  to  the  sixty  and  two,  and  to  place  the  Messiah  at 
the  close  of  the  united  periods,  as  Christian  commentators 
are  in  the  habit  of  doing,  is,  he  assures  us,  "altogether  opf)Osed 
to  the  grammatical  construction  of  the  sentence."^ 

Adoptin<>-,  however,  the  ordinary  acceptation  of  the  arrange-  The  com- 

^         ^  ,  .     ,  ,  1      .1  ii  -J.      mandment 

ments  of  the  prophecy,  it  has  to  be  seen  whether  even  then  its  to  restore   . 

fulfilment  can  be  said  to  have  been  established.      This  turns  Jerusalem. 

upon  the  ascertainment  of  the  date  from  whence  the  prophetic 

period  had  its  course.    It  was  to  begin  when  the  commandment 

for  the  restoration  of  Jerusalem  w^ent  forth.      There  are  four 

edicts  recorded  in  the  scripture,  the  claims  of  which  to  represent 

the  initiatory  period  have  to  be  considered.    The  earliest  is  that 

issued  by  Cyrus  in  his  first  year  (Ezra  i.  1);  the  next  is  that  of 

Darius  in  the  second  year  of  his  reign  (Ezra  iv.  24  ;  vi.  1); 

and  the  third  and  fourth  are  by  Artaxerxes  in  his  seventh  and 

his  twentieth  years  (Ezra  vii.  8,  11  ;  Neh.  ii.  1-8). 

The  edict  of  Cyrus  is  this.  "  Thus  saith  Cyrus,  king  of 
Persia,  the  Lord  God  of  heaven  hath  given  me  all  the  kingdoms 
of  the  earth  ;  and  he  hath  charged  me  to  build  him  an  liouse 
in  Jerusalem,  which  is  in  Judah.  Who  is  there  among  you  of 
all  his  people?  his  God  be  with  him,  and  let  him  go  up  to 
Jerusalem,  which  is  in  Judah,  and  build  the  house  of  the  Lord 
1  Christology,  III.  141.  ^  Adler's  Sermons,  107,  108,  110. 


244j 


PROPHKCY. 


God  of  Israel,  (he  is  the  God,)  which  is  in  Jerusalem."      The 
terms  here  attributed  to  Cyrus,  in  acknowledgment  of  the  God 
of  Israel,  are  obviously  the  offspring  of  the  mind  of  the  Jewish 
writer  who  thus  represents  them.      The  work   so  sanctioned 
having   been   obstructed   by  ill-disposed  persons,  the  Gentile 
authority  was  again  appealed  to.      Search  was  then  made  in 
the   records,  and  the   above  edict  of   Cyrus  being  produced, 
Darius  re-enforced  it.      He  said,  "Let  the  house  be  builded, 
the  place  where  they  offered  sacrifices,  and  let  the  foundations 
thereof  be  strongly  laid."      The  first  edict  of  Artaxerxes  was 
to  allow  the  exiled  Jews  freely  to  accompany  Ezra  to  Jerusalem. 
"  Whatsoever,"  it  said,  "  is  commanded  by  the  God  of  heaven, 
let  it  be  diligently  done  for  the  house  of  the  God  of  heaven." 
Furthermore,    Ezra    was    enjoined    to    ''set    magistrates   and 
judges,  which  may  judge  the  people  that  are  beyond  the  river, 
all  °such  as  know  the  laws  of  thy  God."     Nehemiah  learned 
that  the  city  was  still  lying  waste,  and  asked  the  king  to  be 
allowed  to  go  and  build  it.      His  particular  request  was  that 
he  might  have  "  a  letter  unto  Asaph,  the  keeper  of  the  king's 
forest,  that  he  may  give  me  timber  to  make  beams  for  the 
gates  of  the  palace  which  appertained  to  the  house,  and  for  the 
wall  of  the  city,  and  for  the  house  that  I  shall  enter  into. 
And  the  king,"  it  is  added,  "  granted  me,  according  to  the 
good  hand  of  my  God  upon  me."      The  view  commonly  in- 
sisted on  is  that  this,  which  is  the  last  of  these  edicts,  is  the 
one  from  which  to  date  the  course  of  the  prophetic  period  of 
the  seventy  weeks,  as  it  is  the  only  one  in  which  the  building 
of  the  city  is  actually  mentioned,  the  others  having  reference 
to  the  reconstruction  of  the  temple.      The  bearing  of  these 
several  edicts  has  therefore  to  be  examined. 

The  author  of  the  prophecy  represents  himself  to  have  been 
considering  Jeremiah's  prophecy  of  the  seventy  years'  captivity, 
the  close  of  which  period  was  approaching.  He  set  himself, 
"  by  prayer  and  supplication,"  to  learn  when  the  happy  de- 
liverance at  the  end  of  the  term  was  to  be  (Dan.  ix.  2,  3). 
On  this  the  present  prophecy  was  communicated  to  him,  one 
measure  of  seventy  being  matched  by  another  of  the  same 
sacred  number.  Some  connection  between  these  prophecies 
appears  pointed  to,  and  this  is  secured  if  the  terminating 
period  of  the  one  is  the  opening  period  of  the  other.      Just 


PROPHECY. 


245 


such  a  result  is  obtained  by  accepting  the  edict  of  Cyrus  as  the 
act  initiating  the  course  of  the  present  prophetic  period. 

It  is  objected  that  the  edict  mentions  the  reconstruction  of 
the  temple  only.      But  a  temple  is  nothing  unless  frequented 
and   used   by   worshippers,   and   the  worshippers    must   have 
habitations.      It  would   be   strange    that   Cyrus,   so   solemnly 
appealing  to  the  name  of  God,  should  let  his  people  loose  from 
their  captivity,  allow  them  to  rebuild  the  temple,  and  yet  not 
contemplate  their  making  the  city,  in  which  the  temple  was 
to  stand,  habitable.     And  that  more  than  the  building  of  the 
temple  was  included  in   the   permission  given  appears   from 
subsequent  passages.      Those  hostile  to  the  Jews  wrote  to  the 
then  king  of  Persia,  informing  him  that  they  were   ''  building 
the  rebellious  and  the  bad  city,  and  have  set  up  the  walls 
thereof,  and  joined  the  foundations,"  on  which  the  records  were 
looked  into  ;  and  it  having  been  found  that  the  Jews  had  been 
addicted  to  rebellion,  the  king  issued  an  order,  saying,  "  Give 
ye  now  commandment  to  cause  these  men  to  cease,  and  that 
this  city  be  not  builded  until  another  commandment  shall  be 
given  from  me."      ''  Then,"  it  is  added,  "  ceased  the  work  of 
the  house  of  God  which  is  at  Jerusalem.     So  it  ceased  unto 
the  second  year  of  the  reign  of  Darius,  king  of  Persia"  (Ezra 
iv.  11-24).     On  this  followed  the  second  edict.     Here  we  find 
that  the  edict  of  Cyrus,  specifying  the  temple,  was  considered 
also  to  give  warrant  for  the  reconstruction  of  the  city;   and 
that  the  interdict  of  the  next  king  directed  against  the  recon- 
struction of  the  city,  also  operated  to  put  a  stop  to  the  work  of 
the  temple.      The  city  and  the  temple  are  associated  together 
in  the  order  of  things,  and  so  it  was  in  the  sense  given  to 
these  edicts.      Ezra's  own  construction  was  thus.      He  says,  in 
view  of  the  whole  movement,  "For  we  were  bondmen;  yet  our 
God  hath  not  forsaken  us  in  our  bondage,  but  hath  extended 
mercy  unto  us  in  the  sight  of  the  kings  of  Persia,  to  give  us  a 
reviving,  to  set  up  the  house  of  our  God,  and   to  repair  the 
desolations  thereof,   and  to  give  us  a  wall  in  Judah  and  in 
Jerusalem  "  (Ezra  ix.  9).     A  temple  and  a  wall  without  a  city 
would  be  ridiculous. 

The  edict  of  Darius  named  only  the  temple,  but,  according 
to  this,  the  natural  construction  to  be  put  upon  it,  the  city  was 
also  included.     The  interdict  points  to  this.     The  work  on  the 


246 


PROPHECY. 


PROPHECY. 


247 


city  was  to  be  suspended  "  until  another  commandment  shall 
be  eriven  ; "  and  this  was  that  other  commandment.  The 
whole  illustrates  what  the  prophecy  states,  namely,  that  the 
work  should  be  carried  on  in  "  troublous  times,"  a  feature  the 
writer  could  insert  as  he  wrote  after  the  event. 

The  third  edict,  being  the  first  issued  by  Artaxerxes,  clearly 
contemplates  the  fact  that  the  city  was  being  reconstructed 
under  the  authority  of  the  former  orders,  for  otherwise  how 
could  Ezra  be  expected  to  "  set  magistrates  and  judges"  over 
the  people  ? 

The  fourth  edict,  being  the  one  insisted  on  as  the  initiatory 
order,  has  no  such  character.  It  was  to  afford  Nehemiah  a 
supply  of  timber  to  carry  on  the  work,  and  was  therefore 
merely  supplementary  to  the  earlier  edicts.  It  has  neither 
the  breadth,  nor  the  solemnity,  nor  the  initiatory  features 
necessary  to  give  course  to  the  prophecy,  which  was  to  have 
its  commencement  "  from  the  going  forth,"  or  earliest  issue  of 
the  "commandment  to  restore  and  to  build  Jerusalem."  The 
edict  of  Cyrus  has  all  these  characteristics,  and  there  are 
passages  which  put  it  beyond  question  that  to  his  act  the 
restoration  of  the  city,  as  well  as  of  the  temple,  is  to  be  attri- 
buted. "  Thus  saith  the  Lord — that  confirmeth  the  word  of 
his  servant,  and  performeth  the  counsel  of  his  messengers; 
that  saith  to  Jerusalem,  Thou  shalt  be  inhabited  ;  and  to  the 
cities  of  Judah,  ye  shall  be  built.  That  saith  of  Cyrus,  He  is 
my  shepherd,  and  shall  perform  all  my  pleasure  :  even  saying 
to  Jerusalem,  Thou  shalt  be  built;  and  to  the  temple.  Thy 
foundation  shall  be  laid  "  (Isa.  xliv.  24-28).  "Thus  saith  the 
Lord  to  his  anointed  "  (messiah),  "  to  Cyrus,  whose  right  hand 
I  have  holden,  to  subdue  nations  before  him. — I  have  raised 
him  up  in  righteousness,  and  I  will  direct  all  his  ways  :  he 
shall  build  my  city,  and  he  shall  let  go  my  captives,  not  for 
price  nor  reward,  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts"  (Isa.  xlv.  1,  13). 
Isaiah's  prophecy,  like  that  of  Daniel,  being  written  after  the 
event,  describes  things  as  they  occurred.  To  the  edict  of  Cyrus 
consequently  belongs,  as  a  matter  of  history,  the  restoration  of 
the  city  as  well  as  of  the  temple. 

This  edict  is  said  to  have  been  issued  B.C.  536.  Taking 
the  current  reading  of  the  prophecy,  the  Mef^siah  should  have 
appeared  and  been   "  cut  off"  sixty-nine  weeks,  or  four  hun- 


dred and  eighty-three  years  afterwards.  But  the  death  of 
Jesus  did  not  occur  till  eighty-six  years  later.  Commentators 
therefore  take  refuge  in  the  last  edict  of  Artaxerxes,  which 
comes  nearer  the  point.  The  marginal  date  given  for  this  is 
B.C.  445,  and  as  Jesus  is  said  to  have  been  put  to  death 
A.D.  33,  this  event  occurred  just  five  years  too  early  for  the 
prophecy.  Hengstenberg  places  the  edict  at  B.C.  455,  which 
involves  an  error  to  the  same  extent  the  other  way,  taking 
the  event  five  years  beyond  the  term  of  the  prophecy.  He, 
however,  adjusts  this  by  means  of  a  laboured  examination  of 
Roman  authorities,  producing  uncertain  and  debateable  results, 
whereby  he  gives  the  death  of  Jesus  several  years  earlier  than 
the  date  appearing  in  the  received  version  of  the  Bible. ^ 

The  prophecy  aims  at  exactitude,  which  certainly  has  not 
been  secured  ;  and  for  the  divisional  period  of  the  first  seven 
weeks,  or  forty-nine  years,  a  fulfilment  is  altogether  wanting. 
The  current  idea,  however  ill  supported  by  the  text,  being  that 
this  time  was  occupied  in  the  reconstruction  of  the  city,  Heng- 
stenberg says,  "  So  far  as  this  particular  point  is  concerned, 
but  very  modest  claims  can  be  put  forth  to  a  demonstration  of 
the  agreement  between  prophecy  and  its  fulfilment,  partly 
from  the  nature  of  the  period  itself,  which  is  not  detiiched, 
and  sharply  defined,  and  partly  from  the  fact,  that  Josephus 
passes  over  this  period  altogether,  and  our  historical  informa- 
tion, therefore,  is  as  good  as  none  at  all."  ^ 

(27).     "The  sceptre  shall   not    depart  from  Judah,   nor  a 
lawgiver  from  between  his  feet,  until  Shiloh  come"  (Gen.  xlix.  sceptre 
10).      Dr  Adler  observes  tliat  "throughout  the  whole  Bible  from"^^^ 
the  word  Shiloh  is  never  applied  to  any  personage.      It  is  the  Judah- 
name  of  a  well  known  town  in  the  centre  of  the  Holy  Land, 
belonging  to  the  tribe  of  Ephraim."  ^     Dr  Rowland  Williams, 
in  like  manner,  says,  "  The  Shiloh   of  Genesis  xlix.,  meaning 
the  local  sanctuary  of  Ephraim,  has  been   surrendered  in  its 
personal  reference  by  candid  interpreters."  *     Dr  Adler's  trans- 
lation makes  the  use  of  the  word  in  its  sense  of  a  town  clear  : 
"  The  sceptre  shall  not  depart  from  Judah,  nor  the   lawgiver 
from  between  his  feet,  until  he  cometh  to  Shiloh." 

Supposing,   however,  against   the   above   fair   presumption. 


1  Christology,  III.,  21G,  222-239. 
3  Adler's  Sermons,  11,  12. 


«Idem,  II.,  216,  217. 
*  Hebrew  Prophets,  152. 


248 


PROPHECY. 


Birth  from 
a  viigin. 


that  a  person  is  intended,  Dr  Adler  points  out  that  the  appli- 
cation cannot  be  made  to  Jesus.  "  The  sovereignty  of  Judah 
did  not  cease  at  the  advent  of  the  so-called  Shiloh  ;  it  ceased 
588  years  before  the  birth  of  the  Nazarene,  when  Nebuchad- 
nezzar carried  Zedekiah,  king  of  Judah,  into  captivity.  During 
the  entire  period  of  the  second  temple,  not  one  king  of  the 
tribe  of  Judah  ruled  over  the  nation.  The  Jewish  kings, 
during  this  period,  were  the  Maccabees,  (who,  being  high 
priests,  were  members  of  the  tribe  of  Levi,)  and  Herod  the 
Great,  with  his  descendants,  who  were  foreigners"^  (Edo- 
mites). 

(28).  "Now  the  birth  of  Jesus  Christ  was  on  this  wise: 
When  as  his  mother  Mary  was  espoused  to  Joseph,  before  they 
came  together,  she  was  found  with  child  of  the  Holy  Ghost. — 
Now  all  this  was  done,  that  it  might  be  fulfilled  which  was  spoken 
of  the  Lord  by  the  prophet,  saying,  Behold,  a  virgin  shall  be  witli 
child,  and  shall  bring  forth  a  son,  and  they  shall  call  his  name 
Immanuel,  which  being  interpreted  is,  God  with  us"  (Matt.  i.  18, 
22,  23).  The  passage  so  applied  as  a  prophecy  of  the  birth  of 
Jesus  is  thus  given.  "And  it  came  to  pass  in  the  days  of 
Ahaz  the  son  of  Jotham,  the  son  of  Uzziah,  king  of  Judah, 
that  Rezin  the  king  of  Syria,  and  Pekah  the  son  of  Rema- 
liah,  king  of  Israel,  went  up  toward  Jerusalem  to  war  against 
it,  but  could  not  prevail  against  it. — Then  said  the  Lord  unto 
Isaiah,  Go  forth  now  to  meet  Ahaz, — and  say  unto  him,  Take 
heed,  and  be  quiet ;  fear  not,  neither  be  fainthearted  for  the 
two  tails  of  these  smoking  firebrands,  for  the  fierce  anger  of 
Rezin  with  Syria,  and  of  the  son  of  Remaliah."  Then  Ahaz 
is  told  to  ask  a  sign  that  he  is  to  be  delivered  from  the  im- 
pending danger,  but  he  hesitates  to  do  so,  apprehending  that 
this  would  be  to  tempt  God.  The  prophet  thereupon  says, 
"  Hear  ye  now,  O  house  of  Dav^d ;  Is  it  a  small  thing  for  you 
to  weary  men,  but  will  ye  weary  my  God  also  ?  Therefore  the 
Lord  himself  shall  give  you  a  sign  ;  Behold,  a  virgin  shall  con- 
ceive, and  bear  a  son,  and  shall  call  his  name  Immanuel. 
Butter  and  honey  shall  he  eat,  that  he  may  know  to  refuse  the 
evil,  and  choose  the  good.  For  before  the  child  shall  know  to 
refuse  the  evil,  and  choose  the  good,  the  land  that  thou  abhor- 
rest  shall  be  forsaken  of  both  her  kinirs."     Then  follows  matter 


*  Adler's  Sermons,  11. 


\ 


PROPHECY. 


249 


I 


connected  with  Assyria  and  Egypt,  with  which  countries  Judea 
was  at  the  time  involved  (Is.  vii.  1-18). 

The  word  "  Almah,"  here  translated  virgin,  does  not  neces- 
sarily bear    that    signification.      It    means    merely    a    young 
woman,  and  may  be  applied  even  to  a  married  female.     All 
Hebraists,  among  whom  I  may  cite  Strauss,  Davidson,  and  Row- 
land Williams,  so  render  the  word.     The  circumstances  which 
drew  forth  the  prophet's  utterances  were  those  then  surround- 
ing  Ahaz.      They  related  to  the  hostilities  threatening  him, 
and  his  deliverance  from  the  danger.      The   prophet  chose  to 
give  him  an  assurance,  such  as  here  described,  whatever  its 
import  or  value.     A   young   woman  was  to  have  a  son,  and 
while  the  child  was  still  in  his  infancy  the  help  was  to  come. 
The  prophet  apparently  himself  procreates  the  child  signified. 
"  And  I  took  unto  me,  he  says,  faithful  witnesses  to  record, 
Uriah    the  priest,  and    Zechariah    the    son    of   Jeberechiah. 
And  I  went  unto  the  prophetess  ;   and  she  conceived,  and  bare 
a  son.     Then  said  the  Lord  to  me,  call  his  name  Maher-shalal- 
hash-baz.      For  before  the  child  shall  have  knowledge  to  cry, 
my  father,  and  my  mother,  the  riches  of  Damascus  and  the 
spoil   of   Samaria   shall   be    taken   away   before   the  king   of 
Assyria."     And    then    he    adds,    to    complete    the     position, 
"  Behold,  I  and  the  children  whom  the  Lord  hath   given  me 
are  for  signs  and  for  wonders  in  Israel  from  the  Lord  of  hosts, 
which   dwelleth   in  mount   Zion"    (Isa.   viii.    2-4,   18).      The 
history   corresponds   with    the  prediction  thus  recorded,    the 
accuracy  of  which,  it  may  be  judged,  was  secured  by  its  being 
written  after  the  event,  or  with  sufficient  indications  of  what 
the  event  was  to  be.      Ahaz  sent   messengers  to  the  king  of 
Assyria,  "  saying,  I  am  thy  servant  and  son  :  come  up,  and 
save  me  out  of  the  hand  of  the  king  of  Syria,  and  out  of  the 
hand  of  the  king  of  Israel,  which  rise  up  against  me;"  and  he 
purchased  his  services  with  treasures  taken  from  the  temple  and 
his  palace.      "  And  the  king  of  Assyria  hearkened  unto  him ; 
for  the  king  of  Assyria  went  up  against  Damascus,  and  took  it, 
and  carried  the  people  of  it  captive   to  Kir,  and  slew  Rezin" 
(2  Kings  xvi.  5-9). 

The  prophecy,  so  to  call  it,  becomes  thus  intelligible  ;  but 
if  the  young  woman  in  question  was  the  mother  of  Jesus, 
then  a  "sign"  was    held  out  to   Ahaz  which  he  could  never 


250 


PROPHECY. 


witness.  He  was  to  be  delivered  very  promptly,  and  the  pro- 
phet, professing  to  be  assured  of  his  command  of  the  divine 
resources,  desired  to  keep  up  the  king's  courage  by  some  out- 
ward demonstration  in  support  of  his  word.  Could  it  be  that 
for  this  end  he  pointed  to  something  to  be  enacted  only  after 
a  lapse  of  more  than  seven  hundred  years  ?  And  how  is 
Jesus,  born  at  that  date,  to  be  associated  with  the  two  kings 
who  were  to  be  cut  off  before  he  should  be  old  enough  to 
know  how  ''  to  refuse  the  evil  and  choose  the  good  ?"  Or 
how  could  the  action  of  Assyria,  which  long  before  had  ceased 
to  be,  be  brought  to  bear  upon  the  matter  ? 
Peace  on  (29).   The  augols  who  exhibited  themselves  to  the  shepherds 

^^^'  at  the  birth  of  Jesus,  in  their  invocation,  said,  ''  Glory  to  God 

in  the  highest,  and  on  earth  peace,  goodwill  toward  men" 
(Luke  ii.  14).  The  mission  of  Jesus,  even  to  this  day,  has 
worked  no  such  results.  "  Think  not,"  he  said,  ''  that  I  am 
come  to  send  peace  on  earth  :  I  came  not  to  send  peace,  but 
a  sword.  For  I  am  come  to  set  a  man  at  variance  against  his 
father,  and  the  daughter  against  her  mother,  and  the  daughter- 
in-law  ao^ainst  her  mother-in-law.  And  a  man's  foes  shall  be 
they  of  his  own  household"  (Matt.  x.  34-36).  The  angels 
prophesied  the  reverse  of  what  has  ensued.  The  Christian 
dogmas  have  ever  been  a  source  of  vehement  discord,  expressed, 
too  often,  in  oppression  and  bloodshed  ;  nor  is  it  likely  that 
on  grounds  so  debateable  independent  minds  will  ever  be 
brought,  over  the  face  of  the  earth,  to  stand  together  in  true 
and  unreserved  accord.  Jesus  is  made  to  foresee  such  work- 
inor  of  the  doctrine,  but  this  was  so  written  at  a  time  when 
the  effects  of  the  doctrine  had  become  sufficiently  apparent. 
It  was  a  prognostication  in  conflict  with  the  earlier  one,  put 
forward,  as  in  other  instances,  after  the  event. 
Called  out  (30).  The  life  of  Jesus  being  threatened  by  Herod,  he  is 
of  Egj'pt.  removed  to  Egypt,  and  after  the  death  of  Herod,  when  the 
danger  is  supposed  to  be  over,  he  is  brought  back,  "  that  it 
might  be  fulfilled,"  we  are  told,  "  which  was  spoken  of  the 
Lord  by  the  prophet,  saying,  Out  of  Egypt  have  I  called  my 
son."  (Matt.  ii.  15).  It  would  be  easy  to  sustain  the  prophetic 
gift  in  this  manner,  namely  to  see  what  was  written  and  then 
go  and  do  it.  Nevertheless,  unfortunately,  the  application  will 
not    stand    examination.      The   passage   appealed   to   is   this. 


PROPHECY. 


251 


f 


"When  Israel  was  a  child,  then  I  loved  him,  and  called  my 
son  out  of  Egypt.  As  they  called  them,  so  they  went  from 
them  :  they  sacrificed  unto  Baalim,  and  burned  incense  to 
graven  images.  I  taught  Ephraim  also  to  go,  taking  them  by 
their  arms ;  but  they  knew  not  that  I  healed  them."  (Hos.  xi. 
1-3).  The  reference  is  of  course  to  the  exodus  of  the  Israelites. 
How  in  view  of  the  declared  idolatrous  practices  of  this  pro- 
geny called  out  of  Egypt  Jesus  can  have  been  intended,  it 
would  be  difficult  to  explain. 

(31).  To  ensure  the  death  of  Jesus,  Herod  is  said  to  have  lUchei 
slaughtered  the  infants  round  about.  "  Then,"  it  is  declared,  forXr^ 
"  was  fulfilled  that  which  was  spoken  by  Jeremy  the  prophet,  children, 
saying.  In  Rama  was  there  a  voice  heard,  lamentation  and  weep- 
ing, and  great  mourning,  Hachel  weeping  for  her  children,  and 
would  not  be  comforted,  because  they  are  not."  (Matt.  ii.  17, 
18).  Jeremiah  appears  to  have  had  a  vision  in  his  sleep,  in 
the  course  of  which  comes  the  utterance  thus  made  use  of. 
"  At  the  same  time,"  he  tells  us,  "  saith  the  Lord,  will  I  be 
the  God  of  all  the  families  of  Israel,  and  they  shall  be  my 
people. — Behold,  I  will  bring  them  from  the  north  country, 
and  gather  them  from  the  coasts  of  the  earth. — And  they  shall 
come  with  weeping,  and  with  supplications  will  I  lead  them. — 
For  the  Lord  hath  redeemed  Jacob. — And  I  will  satiate  the 
soul  of  the  priests  with  fatness,  and  my  people  shall  be  satisfied 
with  my  goodness,  saith  the  Lord.  Thus  saith  the  Lord  ;  a 
voice  was  heard  in  Bamah,  lamentation,  and  bitter  weeping ; 
Rachel  weeping  for  her  children  refused  to  be  comforted  for 
her  children,  because  they  were  not.  Thus  saith  the  Lord  ; 
refrain  thy  voice  from  weeping,  and  thine  eyes  from  tears  :  for 
thy  work  shall  be  rewarded,  saith  the  Lord  ;  and  they  shall 
come  again  to  their  own  border.  I  have  surely  heard  Ephraim 
bemoaning  himself. — Is  Ephraim  my  dear  son  ?  is  he  a  plea- 
sant child  ?  for  since  I  spake  against  him,  I  do  earnestly 
remember  him  still :  therefore  my  bowels  are  troubled  for  him  ; 
I  will  surely  have  mercy  upon  him,  saith  the  Lord. — Turn 
again,  0  virgin  of  Israel,  turn  again  to  these  thy  cities. — As 
yet  they  shall  use  this  speech  in  the  land  of  Judah  and  in  the 
cities  thereof,  when  I  shall  bring  again  their  captivity. — For  I 
have  satiated  the  weary  soul,  and  I  have  replenished  every 
sorrowful  soul.     Upon  this   I   awaked,  and   beheld ;   and  my 


252 


PROPHECY. 


PROPHECY. 


253 


sleep  was  sweet  unto  me."  (Jer.  xxxi»  1-2G).  The  "  lamen- 
tatiou"  was  that  cry  of  repentance,  that  *'  coming  with  weeping 
and  with  supplications,"  which  was  to  end  in  God's  acceptance 
of  the  people  and  their  national  deliverance; — a  deliverance,  as 
it  is  expressly  said,  from  "  captivity/'  The  evangelist  has 
not  hesitated  in  this,  as  in  other  instances,  to  wrest  the  pas- 
sage he  makes  use  of  from  its  context,  and  to  apply  it  to  his 
own  purposes,  inapprehensive,  or  regardless,  of  its  real  import. 
To  he  (32).    "  And  he  came  and  dwelt  in  a  city  called  Nazareth  : 

called  a  ^^^^  j^  mi^ht  be  fulfilled  which  was  spoken  by  the  prophets. 
He  shall  be  called  a  Nazarene."  (Matt.  ii.  23).  Here  is 
another  unfortunate  effort  at  propping  up  the  narrative  with 
prophecy.  No  particular  prophet  is  cited  for  the  saying  ad- 
vanced. The  prophets  in  general  are  referred  to,  the  fact 
however  being  that  there  are  none  who  make  any  such 
announcement.  The  Messiah  was  to  be  derived  from  Bethle- 
hem, but  there  is  nothing  to  associate  him  with  Nazareth,  the 
true  city  of  Jesus. 

In  the  desire  to  support  the  gospel  statement  a  solution  is 
however  sometimes  offered.  It  has  been  observed  that  in 
speaking  of  the  Branch  to  come  out  of  Jesse,  Isaiah  (xi.  1) 
has  used  the  term  Nezer,  which  is  supposed  to  convey  "  a  mys- 
terious allusion  to  Nazareth  as  the  future  home  of  the  scion 
of  David."  But  that  the  word  has  been  here  employed  for- 
tuitously, is  apparent,  as  elsewhere,  in  describing  this  same 
Branch,  the  synonymous  term  Zemdch  has  been  resorted  to 
(Jer.  xxiii.  5  ;   xxxiii.  15  ;  Zech.  iii.  8  ;  vi.  xii).^ 

(33).   John  the  Baptist  is  said  to  have  been  the  forerunner 
fore-  of  Jesus  the  Messiah,    ''As  it  is  written  in  the  prophets.  Be- 

hold I  send  my  messenger  before  thy  face,  which  shall  prepare 
thy  way  before  thee."  (Mark  i.  2).  The  prophecy  itself  has 
more  particulars,  and  these  of  considerable  precision.  "  Be- 
hold, I  will  send  my  messenger,  and  he  shall  prepare  the  way 
before  me  :  and  the  Lord,  whom  ye  seek,  shall  suddenly  come 
to  his  temple,  even  the  messenger  of  the  covenant,  whom  ye 
delight  in  :  behold,  he  shall  C9me,  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts. 
But  who  may  abide  the  day  of  his  coming  ?  and  who  shall 
stand  when  he  appeareth  ?  for  he  is  like  a  refiner's  fire,  and 
like  fuller's  sope  ;   and  he  shall  sit  as  a  refiner  and  purifier  of 

1  Strauss'  New  Life  of  Jesus,  II.  86,  87. 


runner. 


silver  :  and  he  shall  purify  the  sons  of  Levi,  and  purge  them 
as  gold  and  silver,  that  they  may  offer  unto  the  Lord  an  offer- 
ing in  righteousness.      Then  shall  the  offering  of  Judah  and 
Jerusalem  be  pleasant  unto  the  Lord,  as   in   the  days  of  old, 
and  as  in  former  years. — Remember  ye  the  law  of  Moses  my 
servant,  which  I  conmianded  unto  him  in  Horeb  for  all  Israel, 
with  the  statutes  and  judgments.      Behold,  I  will  send  you 
Elijah  the  prophet  before  the  coming  of  the  great  and  dreadful 
day  of  the  Lord  :  and  he  shall  turn  the  heart  of  the  fathers  to 
the  children,  and  the  heart  of  the  children  to  their  fathers,  lest 
"I  come  and  smite  the  earth  with  a  curse."   (Mai.   iii.  1-4; 
iv.  4-6).     It  was  a  bold  declaration  to  make  that  the  well- 
known  prophet  Elijah  should  himself  re-appear  on  earth  and 
resume    his    ministrations   preparatory  to   the  advent  of  the 
Messiah,  but  it  remains  still  unrealized.     There  was  an  attempt 
to  pass  off  John  as  representing  Elijah ;  "  If  ye  will  receive  it, 
this  is  Elias,  which  was  for  to  come,"  (Matt.  xi.  14) ;  but  John 
himself,  when  appealed  to,  was  unaware  that  he  was  fulfilling 
such  type.      They  asked  him,   "  Art  thou  Elias  ?"  and  his  an- 
swer was,  "I  am  not."  (John  i.  21).      Still  the  association  of 
Elias  with  the  Messiah  remains  a  fixed  necessity.     Two  advents 
of  the  Messiah  are  insisted  on,  and  with  him  was  to  be  Elias. 
But  there  is  assuredly  only  one  advent   of  Elias  spoken  of. 
And  its  concomitants  are  all  dissimilar  from  what  characterize 
the  career  of  Jesus.     When  he  came,  he  was  not  accepted  with 
*'  delight "  as  the  "  messenger  of  the  covenant,"  but  rejected 
and  put  an  end  to.      He  was  no  "purifier of  the  sons  of  Levi" 
and  renovator  of  the  sacrificial  offerings  of  Judah  and  Jerusa- 
lem, as  in  the  days  of  old,  as  in  the  former  years,  but  intro- 
duced himself  as  a  priest  of  another  order,  "  of  which,"  hitherto, 
"  no  man  gave  attendance  at  the  altar,"  and  for  a  sacrifice 
"  offered  up  himself"   (Heb.  vii.  11-28).      The  old  system  was 
done    away    with    "  for    the    weakness   and    unprofitableness 
thereof"  (ver.  18).    He  introduced  no  "great  and  dreadful  day," 
but  himself  fell  under  the  power  of  his  adversaries  and   "  was 
crucified  through  weakness,"  (2  Cor.  xiii.  4) ;  and  his  dispensa- 
tion has  set  aside  that  "  law  of  Moses  commanded  in  Horeb," 
with  all  its   "  statutes  and  judgments,"  which,  according  to 
the  exigency  of  the  prophecy,  were  to  be  renovated  in  purity. 
(34).   Another  passage  is  also  applied  to  John  as  prophesy- 


254 


PROPHECY. 


PROPHECY. 


255 


The  voice  ing  of  him.  "  This  is  he  that  was  spoken  of  by  the  prophet 
the  wfider-  Esaias,  saying,  The  voice  of  one  crying  in  the  wilderness,  Pre- 
"^^'''  pare  ye  the  way  of  the  Lord,  make  his  paths  straight"  (Matt, 

iii.  3).  It  stands  in  the  writings  of  Isaiah  thus.  "  Comfort 
ye,  comfort  ye  my  people,  saith  your  God.  Speak  ye  comfort- 
ably to  Jerusalem,  and  cry  unto  her,  that  her  warfare  is 
accomplished,  that  her  iniquity  is  pardoned  :  for  she  hath 
received  of  the  Lord's  hand  double  for  all  her  sins.  Tlie  voice 
of  him  that  crieth  in  the  wilderness,  Prepare  ye  the  way  of  the 
Lord,  make  straight  in  the  desert  a  liighway  for  our  God. 
Every  valley  shall  be  exalted,  and  every  mountain  and  hill 
shall  be  made  low  :  and  the  crooked  shall  be  made  straight, 
and  the  rough  places  plain  :  and  the  glory  of  the  Lord  shall 
be  revealed,  and  all  flesh  shall  see  it  together  :  for  the  mouth 
of  the  Lord  hath  spoken  it"  (Isa.  xl.  1-5).  This  application  to 
John  is  another  instance  of  a  passage  taken  from  its  context, 
and  applied  in  a  sense  at  variance  with  its  proper  meaning. 
The  voice  in  the  wilderness  is  in  association  with  the  trium- 
phant, not  the  suffering  Messiah.  It  is  raised  when  the  deal- 
ing's of  God  with  the  Jews  are  closed  in  their  final  acceptance 
and  re-establishment  in  their  own  land.  To  say  that  John's 
utterance  is  a  realisation  of  this  voice  when  all  the  surrounding 
and  ensuing  circumstances  were  of  a  totally  different  character, 
is  to  treat  the  text  with  evident  violation  of  its  import. 
The  land  (35).    "  Now  when  Jesus  had  heard  that  John  was  cast  into 

of  Zabulon,  ppij^Q^,  he  departed  into  Galilee  ;  and  leaving  Nazareth,  he 
came  and  dwelt  in  Capernaum,  which  is  upon  the  sea  coast,  in 
the  borders  of  Zabulon  and  Nephthalim  :  that  it  might  be  ful- 
filled which  was  spoken  by  Esaias  the  prophet,  saying.  The 
land  of  Zabulon,  and  the  land  of  Nephthalim,  by  the  way  of 
the  sea,  beyond  Jordan,  Galilee  of  the  Gentiles  ;  the  people 
which  sat  in  darkness  saw  great  light ;  and  to  them  which  sat 
in  the  region  and  shadow  of  death  light  is  sprung  up"  (Matt, 
iv.  1  2-16).  The  object  of  the  evangelist  is  to  show  that  every 
act  of  the  subject  of  his  narrative  was  a  fulfilment  of  ancient 
prophecy.  Even  so  inevitable  a  circumstance  in  the  life  of  a 
peripatetic  teacher  as  his  moving  about  from  place  to  place 
had  been  foretold.  But  the  process  of  application  is,  as  usual, 
effected  by  extracting  a  passage  to  the  exclusion  of  those 
parts    attaching  to  it  which  give   it  a   signification   differing 


from  that  which  it  is  sought  to  ascribe  to  it.  It  stands  thus  in 
the  original.  "  Nevertheless  the  dimness  shall  not  be  such  as 
was  in  her  vexation,  when  at  the  first  he  lightly  afflicted  the 
land  of  Zebulun  and  the  land  of  Naphtali,  and  afterward  did 
more  grievously  afflict  her  by  the  way  of  the  sea,  beyond 
Jordan,  in  GaUlee  of  the  nations"  (Isa.  ix.  1).  The  evangelist 
picks  out  the  names  of  the  places,  and  associates  them  with 
the  operations  of  his  wandering  teacher,  carefully  omitting  all 
advertance  to  the  "  vexation,"  the  being  "  lightly  afflicted,"  or 
the  being  "  more  grievously  afflicted,"  attaching  to  the  men- 
tion of  these  places,  which  did  not  consort  with  his  imputed 
meaning.  The  prophet  was,  in  fact,  occupying  himself  with 
an  entirely  different  subject,  namely,  the  physical  sufferings  of 
the  nation  occurring  in  his  day  from  the  assaults  of  their 
enemies.  "  For  thou  hast  broken,"  he  goes  on  to  say,  "  the 
yoke  of  his  burden,  and  the  staff  of  his  shoulder,  the  rod  of 
his  oppressor,  as  in  the  day  of  Midian.  For  every  battle  of 
the  warrior  is  with  confused  noise,  and  garments  rolled  in 
blood  ;  but  this  shall  be  with  burning  and  fuel  of  fire. — There- 
fore the  Lord  shall  set  up  the  adversaries  of  Rezin  against  him, 
and  join  his  enemies  together;  the  Syrians  before,  and  the 
Philistines  behind  ;  and  they  shall  devour  Israel  with  open 
mouth.  For  all  this  his  anger  is  not  turned  away,  but  his 
hand  is  stretched  out  still. — Therefore  the  Lord  will  cut  off 
from  Israel  head  and  tail,  branch  and  rush,  in  one  day. — They 
shall  eat  every  man  the  flesh  of  his  own  arm  :  Manasseh, 
Ephraim  ;  and  Ephraim,  Manasseh  :  and  they  together  shall 
be  against  Judah."  The  people  dwelling  "  in  the  land  of  the 
shadow  of  death"  were  those  suffering  from  the  sword  of  their 
enemies  in  the  days  of  Isaiah,  and  the  ''  light"  that  ''  shined'* 
upon  them  was  the  hope  of  deliverance  from  physical  dangers 
which  he  promised  them.  Rezin  and  the  Syrians  are  parti- 
cularly instanced,  and  rescue  from  them  he  had  just  before 
prognosticated  through  the  sign  he  put  before  Ahaz  in  the 
birth  of  his  own  son.  That  sign  liad  been  applied  by  Mattliew 
to  signify  the  birth  of  Jesus  from  a  virgin  mother ;  and  now, 
in  like  manner,  he  takes  the  hope  of  escape  from  hostile 
operations,  then  threatening  the  Israelites,  to  signify  the  moral 
light  presented  to  them,  many  centuries  later,  in  the  teachings 
of  Jesus. 


256 


PROPHECY. 


The 

acceptable 

yeai*. 


(36.)  "And  there  was  delivered  unto  him  the  book  of  the 
prophet  Esaias.  And  when  he  had  opened  the  book,  he  found 
the  place  where  it  was  written,  The  spirit  of  the  Lord  is  upon 
me,  because  he  hath  anointed  me  to  preach  the  gospel  to  the 
poor  ;  he  hath  sent  me  to  heal  the  broken-hearted,  to  preach 
deliverance  to  the  captives,  and  recovering  the  sight  to  the 
blind,  to  set  at  liberty  them  that  are  bruised.  To  preach  the 
acceptable  year  of  the  Lord.  And  he  closed  the  book. — And 
he  began  to  say  imto  them.  This  day  is  this  scripture  fulfilled 
in  your  ears"  (Luke  iv.  17-21).  The  passage  made  use  of 
stands  thus.  "  The 'spirit  of  the  Lord  God  is  upon  me;  because 
the  Lord  hath  anointed  me  to  preach  good  tidings  unto  the 
meek  ;  he  hath  sent  me  to  bind  up  the  broken-hearted,  to 
proclaim  liberty  to  the  captives,  and  the  opening  of  the  prison 
to  them  that  are  bound  ;  to  preach  the  acceptable  year  of  the 
Lord,  and  the  day  of  vengeance  of  our  God  ;  to  comfort  all 
that  mourn ;  to  appoint  unto  them  that  mourn  in  Zion,  to  give 
unto  them  beauty  for  ashes,  the  oil  of  joy  for  mourning,  the 
garment  of  praise  for  the  spirit  of  heaviness ;  that  they  might 
be  called  trees  of  righteousness,  the  planting  of  the  Lord,  that 
he  might  be  glorified.  And  they  shall  build  the  old  wastes, 
they  shall  raise  up  the  former  desolations,  and  they  shall  repair 
the  waste  cities,  the  desolations  of  many  generations. — Ye  shall 
eat  the  riches  of  the  Gentiles,  and  in  their  glory  shall  ye  boast 
yourselves. — In  their  land  they  shall  possess  the  double  :  ever- 
lasting joy  shall  be  unto  them. — And  I  will  make  an  everlasting 
covenant  with  them.  And  their  seed  shall  be  known  among 
the  Gentiles,  and  their  offspring  among  the  people  :  all  that 
see  them  shall  acknowledge  them,  that  they  are  the  seed  which 
the  Lord  hath  blessed  "  (Isa.  Ixi.  1-9).  It  is  the  oft  recurring 
theme  of  the  restoration  of  Israel  and  their  domination  over 
the  Gentile  nations.  *'  The  good  tidings  "  proclaimed  are  not 
the  "  gospel  "  we  are  accustomed  to  hear  announced  by  the 
followers  of  Jesus.  They  relate  to  positive  deliverance  from 
actual  captivity,  to  material  prosperity,  to  national  ascendancy, 
and  were  not  expressed  by  moral  reformation  merely,  and  still 
less  by  a  fusion  of  all  nations  into  one  common  assemblage, 
such  as  the  Christian  community,  with  equal  advantages  to  all. 
The  context  has  again  been  cut  off  to  suit  the  occasion,  and  a 
very  remarkable  stop  placed  in  the  middle  of  a  sentence  where 


PROPHECY. 


257 


its  concluding  portion  warred  against  the  application  to  be 
made  of  it.  But  "  the  acceptable  year  of  the  Lord,"  in  the 
prophet's  eye,  is  indisputably  bound  up  with  "the  day  of 
vengeance  "  of  his  God.  Israel  are  not  re-established  till  her 
enemies  are  finally  overthrown. 

(37.)  "All  these  things  spake  Jesus  unto  the  multitude  in  Speaking 
parables;  and  without  a  parable  spake  he  not  unto  them  :  that  "bie^" 
it  might  be  fulfilled  which  was  spoken  by  the  prophet,  saying, 
I  will  open  my  mouth  in  parables  ;  I  will  utter  things  which 
have  been  kept  secret  from  the  foundation  of  the  world"  (Matt, 
xiii.  34,  35).  "Why,"  his  disciples  had  asked,  "  speakest 
thou  unto  them  in  parables  ?  He  answered  and  said  unto 
them,  Because  it  is  given  unto  you  to  know  the  mysteries  of 
the  kingdom  of  heaven,  but  to  them  it  is  not  given  "  (ver.  1 0, 1  ] ). 
This  was  certainly  a  strange  type  of  discourse,  intended  avowedly 
to  mystify,  not  to  instruct.  The  object,  however,  was  to  place 
Jesus  before  us  as  one  whose  every  step  was  assured  upon  pro- 
phetic utterances.  His  progress  from  place  to  place  in  Galilee 
is  so  marked  out,  and  now  his  method  of  setting  forth  what  he 
had  to  say.  The  passage  relied  upon  as  the  prediction  is  this: 
"  Give  ear,  O  my  people,  to  my  law :  incline  your  eai^s  to  the 
words  of  my  mouth.  I  will  open  my  mouth  in  a  parable :  I 
will  utter  dark  sayings  of  old :  which  we  have  heard  and  known, 
and  our  fathers  have  told  us.  We  will  not  hide  them  from 
their  children,  showing  to  the  generation  to  come  the  praises 
of  the  Lord,  and  his  strength,  and  his  wonderful  works,  that 
he  hath  done.  For  he  established  a  testimony  in  Jacob,  and 
appointed  a  law  in  Israel,  which  he  commanded  our  fathers, 
that  they  should  make  them  known  to  their  children  :  that 
the  generation  to  come  might  know  them,  even  the  children 
which  should  be  born  ;  who  should  arise  and  declare  them  to 
their  children  ;  that  they  might  set  their  hope  in  God,  and 
not  forget  the  works  of  God,  but  keep  his  commandments  " 
(Ps.  Ixxviii.  1-7).  How  such  declarations  as  these  were  pro- 
phetic of  the  method  of  Jesus  in  his  discourses  is  not  apparent. 
The  passage  recited,  as  has  commonly  proved  to  be  the  case, 
conveys  a  signification  the  reverse  of  that  for  which  it  is  made 
use  of.  It  speaks  of  the  revelation  of  God  given  forth  with 
the   utmost   openness,  to  be   transmitted  from  generation  to 


258 


PROPHECY. 


generation,  to  lead  all  to  God,  and  not  of  doctrines  deliberately 
veiled  from  the  understanding  of  the  multitude. 
Taking  on  (38).  ''When  the  even  was  come,  they  brought  unto  him 
infirmities,  many  that  were  possessed  with  devils  :  and  he  cast  out  the 
spirits  with  his  word,  and  healed  all  that  were  sick  :  that  it 
might  be  fulfilled  which  was  spoken  by  Esaias  the  prophet, 
saying,  Himself  took  our  infirmities,  and  bare  our  sicknesses  " 
(Matt.  viii.  16,  17).  The  passage  referred  to  is,  *' Surely  he 
hath  borne  our  griefs,  and  carried  our  sorrows  "  (Isa.  liii.  4). 
It  is  moral,  not  physical  suffering,  that  is  spoken  of.  There  is 
not  a  word  said  as  to  bodily  infirmities  and  sicknesses,  or  their 
alleviation.  It  is  again  a  passage  turned  from  its  proper 
import  in  order  to  support  the  idea  of  prophetic  action, 
v^hohath  (39).  ''But  though  he  had  done  so  many  miracles  before 
om- report?  them,  yet  they  believed  not  on  him  :  that  the  saying  of  Esaias 
the  prophet  might  be  fulfilled,  which  he  spake.  Lord,  who 
hath  believed  our  report  ?  and  to  whom  hath  the  arm  of  the 
Lord  been  revealed  ?  Therefore  they  could  not  believe,  be- 
cause that  Esaias  said  again.  He  hath  blinded  their  eyes,  and 
hardened  their  heart ;  that  they  should  not  see  with  their 
eyes,  nor  understand  with  their  heart,  and  be  converted,  and 
I  should  heal  them.  These  things  said  Esaias,  when  he  saw- 
bis  glory,  and  spake  of  him  "  (John  xii.  37-41).  The  pas- 
sages cited  are  these.  "  Who  hath  believed  our  report  ?  and 
to  whom  is  the  arm  of  the  Lord  revealed  1  For  he  shall  grow 
up  before  him  as  a  tender  plant,  and  as  a  root  out  of  a  dry 
gTound  :  he  hath  no  form  nor  comeliness  ;  and  when  we  shall 
see  him,  there  is  no  beauty  that  we  should  desire  him.  He 
is  despised  and  rejected  of  men  ;  a  man  of  sorrows  and  ac- 
quainted with  grief;  and  we  hid,  as  it  were,  our  faces  from 
him  ;  he  was  despised,  and  we  esteemed  him  not "  (Isa.  liii. 
1-3).  "In  the  year  that  king  Uzziah  died  I  saw  also  the 
Lord  sitting  upon  a  throne,  high  and  lifted  up,  and  his  train 
filled  the  temple, — Also  I  heard  the  voice  of  the  Lord,  saying, 
Whom  shall  I  send,  and  who  will  go  for  us  ?  Then  said  I, 
Here  am  I,  send  me.  And  he  said.  Go,  and  tell  this  people, 
Hear  ye  indeed,  but  understand  not ;  and  see  ye  indeed,  but 
perceive  not.  Make  the  heart  of  this  people  fat,  and  make 
their  ears  heavy,  and  shut  their  eyes  ;  lest  they  see  with  their 
eyes,   and  hear  with   their  ears,    and   understand   with  their 


PROPHECY. 


259 


heart,  and  convert,  and  be  healed.  Then  said  I,  Lord,  how 
long  ?  and  he  answered,  until  the  cities  be  wasted  without 
inhabitants,  and  the  houses  without  man,  and  the  land  be 
utterly  desolate,  and  the  Lord  have  removed  men  far  away, 
and  there  be  a  great  forsaking  in  the  midst  of  the  land" 
(Isa.  vi.  1-12). 

The  passages  here  in  question  are  on  distinct  subjects.  The 
one  relates  to  a  personage  presenting  himself  as  a  man  of 
sorrows,  and  who  is  rejected  ;  the  other,  to  a  visitation  for  a 
time  of  the  Jewish  nation.  The  Evangelist  puts  these  pas- 
sages together,  and  applies  them  to  a  very  different  purpose. 
He  says  they  account  for  the  rejection  by  the  Jews  of  the 
miracles  wrought  before  them  by  Jesus,  wherein  the  "  glory  " 
of  Jesus  had  been  manifested,  and  which  Esaias  had  seen  and 
spoken  of.  What  glory  there  could  be  in  enacting  wonders 
in  the  presence  of  people  purposely  hardened  against  accept- 
ing them,  it  is  difficult  to  imagine  ;  nor  is  it  to  be  understood 
how  Esaias,  in  describing  certain  conditions  of  things,  can  be 
said  to  have  seen  and  spoken  of  certain  others  that  are  not 
mentioned  by  him. 

(40).  "And  the  Jews'  passover  was  at  hand;  and  Jesus  The  zeal  of 
went  up  to  Jerusalem,  and  found  in  the  temple  those  that  house,  &c. 
sold  oxen  and  sheep,  and  doves,  and  the  changers  of  money, 
sitting  :  and  when  he  had  made  a  scourge  of  small  cords,  he 
drove  them  all  out  of  the  temple,  and  the  sheep,  and  the 
oxen  ;  and  poured  out  the  changers'  money,  and  overthrew  the 
tables  ;  and  said  unto  them  that  sold  doves,  Take  these  things 
hence ;  make  not  my  Father's  house  an  house  of  merchandise. 
And  his  disciples  remembered  that  it  was  written.  The  zeal  of 
thine  house  hath  eaten  me  up"  (John  ii.  13-17).  The  pas- 
sage made  use  of  is  given  thus.  "  Save  me,  0  God  ;  for  the 
waters  are  come  in  unto  my  soul.  I  sink  in  deep  mire,  where 
there  is  no  standing  ;  I  am  come  into  deep  waters,  where  the 
floods  overflow  me.  O  God,  thou  knowest  my  foolishness, 
and  my  sins  are  not  hid  from  thee. — For  thy  sake  I  have 
borne  reproach  ;  shame  hath  covered  my  face.  I  am  become 
a  stranger  unto  my  brethren,  and  an  alien  unto  my  mother's 
children.  For  the  zeal  of  thine  house  hath  eaten  me  up  ;  and 
the  reproaches  of  them  that  reproached  thee  are  fallen  upon 
me "   (Ps.  Ixix.  1-9).     What  the  utterances  of  the  Psalmist, 


Riding  on 
an  ass. 


260 


PROPHECY. 


-when  tinder  the  sense  of  sin  and  sorrow,  can  have  had  to  do 
in  foresliadowing  the  acts  of  violence  attributed  to  Jesus  in 
ejecting  from  the  temple  people  with  whose  ways  he  was  dis- 
pleased, it  is  impossible  to  say. 

(41).    "And  when   they  drew  nigh  unto  Jerusalem,    and 
were  come  to  Bethphage,  unto  the  mount  of  Olives,  then  sent 
Jesus  two  disciples,  saying  unto  them.  Go  into  the  village  over 
against   you,  and   straightway  ye  shall  find  an  ass  tied,  and  a 
colt  with  her  :  loose  them,  and  bring  them  unto  me.      And   if 
any  man  say  ought  unto  you,  ye  shall  say,  The  Lord  hath  need 
of  them  ;  and   straightway  he  will   send   them.      All   this  was 
done,  that  it  might  be  fulfilled  which  was  spoken  by  the  pro- 
phet, saying,  Tell  ye   the  daughter  of  Zion,  Behold,  thy  King 
Cometh  unto  thee,  meek,  and   sitting  upon  an  ass,  and   a   colt, 
the   foal  of  an  ass  "  (Matt.  xxi.  1-5).      The   Evangehst    does 
not  see  that  the  "  ass  "  here   spoken  of,  and   the  "  foal   of  an 
ass,"  are  one  and  the  same,  according  to  a  Hebrew  method  of 
emphasising  by  reiteration,  the  phrase  signifying  "  an  ass,  even 
a  colt  the  foal  of  an  ass."     Falling  into  this  error,  he  does  not 
hesitate  to  shape  the  event  to  bear  out  his  reading,  represent- 
ing that  two   animals  were  in  question,   and   most   absurdly 
stating  that  Jesus  managed  to  seat  himself  upon  both.      "  And 
(they)  brought  the  ass,"  he  says,  ''  and  the   colt,  and   put   on 
them   their  clothes,   and   they  set  him   thereon."     The  other 
evangelists  avoid  such  misreading,  and  with  them  there  is  but 
one  animal,  namely  an  ass's  foal. 

The  chapter  in  which  this  prophecy  stands,  opens  with 
denunciations  of  Tyre,  Sidon,  and  the  Philistines,  who  are  to 
be  overthrown  or  brought  under  subjection.  The  passage  cited 
is  associated  with  these  events,  and  with  the  rule  of  the  promised 
king  of  Jerusalem.  *'  And  I  will  encamp,"  it  is  said,  ''  about 
mine  house  because  of  the  army,  because  of  him  that  passeth 
by,  and  because  of  him  that  returneth  :  and  no  oppressor  shall 
pass  through  any  more  :  for  now  have  I  seen  with  mine  eyes. 
Rejoice  greatly,  O  daughter  of  Zion  ;  shout,  0  daughter  of 
Jerusalem  :  behold,  thy  king  cometh  unto  thee  :  he  is  just, 
and  having  salvation;  lowly,  and  riding  upon  an  ass,  and  upon 
a  colt,  the  foal  of  an  ass.  And  I  will  cut  off  the  chariot  from 
Jerusalem,  and  the  battle  bow  shall  be  cut  off:  and  he  shall 
speak  peace  unto  the   heathen  :   and  his  dominion  shall  be 


PROPHECY. 


261 


from  sea  even  to  sea,  and  from  the  river  even  to  the  ends  of 
the  earth"  (Zech.  ix.  8-10).      The  personage   here  spoken  of 
is  an  actual  earthly  ruler.      He  is  to  put  down  all  hostilities, 
and  to   exercise   "dominion"  over  territories  defined   within 
certain  expressed  limits.      He  might  show  himself  in  kingly 
state,  surrounded  with  the  pomp  and  parade  consistent  with 
possession  of  wealth,  dignity,  and  power;  but  his  pleasure  is  to 
avoid   all  display  indicative  of  pride,  and  to  give  evidence  of 
the  lowliness  and   humility  of  his  disposition.     And  he  does 
this  by  entering  Jerusalem  on  an  ass,  as  might  any  ordinary 
inhabitant.      None    of   these    surrounding    circumstances    be- 
longed to  Jesus.     He  possessed  no  armed  forces  ;  he  put  down 
no  hostile  nations  ;  and  he  had  no  earthly  possessions,  far  less 
any  regal  dominion.      '*  His  kingdom  was  not  of  this  world." 
He   claimed    no  territories  stretching  "from  sea  to  sea,  and 
from  the  river  even  to  the  ends  of  the  earth."      He  carne  in 
"  the  form  of  a  servant,"  and  had  not  "  where  to  lay  his  head." 
Known   merely  as  the   son  of  a  carpenter,  and  an  itinerant 
preacher,  it  was  no  humiliation,  but  rather  an  exaltation,  to 
him,  to  be  seen  borne  in  any  manner  but  upon  his  own   feet. 
In  those  countries  to  ride  on  an  ass  is  no  degradation,  this 
being  still  the  ordinary  conveyance  of  the  wealthiest  citizens. 
Jesus  riding  on  an  ass  of  itself  expressed  nothing,  hundreds 
daily  doing  the  like.     To  make  the  representation  in  Zechariah 
applicable  as  a  prophecy,  all    those  other  circumstances,   be- 
tokening the  triumphant  Messiah,  were  necessary  ;  and  in  the 
instance  of  Jesus  the  whole  were  wanting.      As  on  so  many 
previous,  occasions  which  have  been  pointed  out,  the  evangelist, 
eager  to  prove  the  one  he  wrote  of  to  be  the  predicted  Messiah^ 
seizes  upon  some  one  incident  or  phrase,  wrenches  it  from  its 
context,  and  arbitrarily  adapts  it  to  his  subject,  regardless  of 
the  accompanying  features,  which,  if  cited,  would  expose  the 
inapplicability  of  the  reference. 

(42.)  ''And  when  the  chief  priests  and  scribes  saw  the  Out  of  the 
wonderful  things  that  he  did,  and  the  children  crying  in  the  batet&c 
temple,  and  saying,  ''  Hosanna  to  the  son  of  David  ;  they  were 
sore  displeased,  and  said  unto  him,  hearest  thou  what  these 
say  ?  And  Jesus  saith  unto  them,  yea ;  have  ye  never  read, 
out  of  the  mouth  of  babes  and  sucklings  thou  hast  perfected 
praise?"  (Matt.  xxi.  15,  IG).      The  phrase  in  question  might 


262 


PROPHECY. 


PROPHECY. 


263 


be  referred  to  legitimately  as  a  saying,  but  certainly  not  as  a 
prophetic  one.  It  occurs  thus.  "  0  Lord  our  Lord,  how  ex- 
cellent is  thy  name  in  all  the  earth  !  who  hast  set  thy  glory 
above  the  heavens.  Out  of  the  mouth  of  babes  and  sucklings 
hast  thou  ordained  strength  because  of  thine  enemies,  that 
thou  mightest  still  the  enemy  and  the  avenger.  When  I  con- 
sider thy  heavens,  the  work  of  thy  fingers,  the  moon  and  the 
stars,  which  thou  hast  ordained  ;  what  is  man,  that  thou  art 
mindful  of  him?  and  the  son  of  man,  that  thou  visitest  him?" 
(Ps.  viii.  1-4).  The  whole  is  an  invocation  to  the  Creator  as 
displaying  himself  in  his  works,  in  which  aspect  Jesus  was 
certainly  not  exhibited,  either  on  the  occasion  in  question  or 
on  any  other. 
Treachery         (43.)   "I   speak    not   of  you   all:    I    know  whom    I    have 

oi  Judas.         1  1      ,     .1  1 

chosen  :    but  that   the   scripture    may  be   fulfilled.    He    that 
eateth  bread  with  me   hath   lifted   up  his  heel  against  me." 
And  when  asked  who  it  was  who  should   betray  him,  Jesus,  to 
be  in  keeping  with  the  citation  he  had  made,  answered,  "  He 
it  is,  to  whom  I  shall  give  a  sop,  when  I  have  dipped  it.     And 
when  he  had  dipped  the  sop,  he  gave  it  to  Judas  Iscariot " 
(John   xiii.   18,   2G).       The    passage    quoted    is    thus    given. 
"  Blessed  is  he  that  considereth  the  poor  :  the  Lord  will  deliver 
him  in  time  of  trouble. — The  Lord  will  strengthen  him  upon 
the  bed  of  languishing  :  thou  wilt  make  all  his  bed   in  his 
sickness.      I  said.  Lord,  be  merciful  unto  me  :   heal  my  soul ; 
for  I  have  sinned  against  thee.      Mine  enemies  speak   evil  of 
me,  when  shall  he  die,  and  his  name  perish  ?— All  they  that 
hate  me  whisper  together  against  me  :  against  me   do  they 
devise  my  hurt. — Yea,  mine  own  familiar  friend,  in  whom  I 
trusted,  which  did   eat  of  my  bread,  hath  lifted  up  his  heel 
against  me.      But  thou,   0  Lord,  be   merciful  unto  me,  and 
raise  me  up,  that  I  may  requite  them"   (Ps.  xli.  1-10).      Was 
Judas  Iscariot,  never  mentioned  but  to  be  held  up  to  detesta- 
•  tion,  the   "  familiar  friend  "  of  Jesus  ?     And  was  he  one  "  in 
whom  he  trusted  ? "     Armed  with   divine  knowledge,  Jesus  is 
represented   to  have  known  him  all  along.      "  I  speak  not  of 
you  all :  I  know  whom   I  have  chosen,"   ''  for  he  knew  who 
should  betray  him"  (John  xiii.  11,  18),  designating  him  "the 
son  of  perdition"  (John  xvii.  12).      Judas'  eating  bread  with 
Jesus,  as  the  evangelist  puts  it,  does  not  fulfil  the  prophet's 


description,  which  is  that  of  a  dependant  "  which  did  eat  of  my 
bread."  It  is  clear  therefore,  on  all  these  grounds,  that  the 
Psalmist  spoke  not  of  Jesus  and  Judas.  He  had  no  such 
special  act  before  him  as  the  treachery  of  Judas.  He  was 
describing  some  mere  mortal,  broken  down  by  persecution  and 
ingratitude,  and  labouring  under  the  sense  of  his  own  sinful- 
ness and  unworthiness,  a  very  common  type  of  suffering 
humanity,  but  quite  inapplicable  to  the  divinely  born  and 
immaculate  Jesus. 

^  (44).   Judas  receives  thirty  pieces  of  silver  as  the  wages  of  Wages  of 
his   treachery.       Afterwards,    repenting,   he   casts   the   money  '^"*^^- 
down   in  the  temple,  and   hangs  himself      The  chief  priests, 
deeming  it  unlawful  to  place  the  money  in  the  treasury,  pur- 
chase therewith  a  potter's  field.      "  Then,"  it  is  added,  ''  was 
fulfilled  that  which  was  spoken  by  Jeremy  the  prophet,  saying, 
And  they  took  the  thirty  pieces  of  silver,  the  price  of  him  that 
was  valued,  whom  they  of  the  children  of  Israel  did  value  ;  and 
gave  them  for  the  potter's   field,  as  the  Lord  appointed  me" 
(Matt,  xxvii.  8-10).      The  evangelist,  for  whom  inspiration  is 
claimed,  makes  the  mistake  of  quoting  Jeremiah  for  Zechariah. 
The  passage  appears  thus.    "  Open  thy  doors,  0  Lebanon,  that 
the  fire  may  devour  thy  cedars. — Thus  saith  the  Lord  my  God; 
Feed   the   flock   of  the  slaughter. — And  I  took  unto   me  two 
staves  ;  the  one  I  called  Beauty,  and  the  other  I  called  Bands ; 
and  I  fed  the  flock. — And  I  took  my  staflT,  even  Beauty,  and 
cut  it  asunder,  that  I  might  break  my  covenant  which  I  had 
made  with  all  the  people.      And  it  was  broken  in   that  day  : 
and  so  the  poor  of  the  flock  that  waited  upon  me  knew  that  it 
was  the  word  of  the  Lord.     And  I  said  unto  them,  If  ye  think 
good,  give  me  my  price  ;  and  if  not,  forbear.     So  they  weighed 
for  my  price  thirty  pieces  of  silver.      And  the  Lord  said  unto 
me.  Cast  it  unto  the  potter  :  a  goodly  price  that  I  was  priced 
at  of  them.      And  I  took  the  thirty  pieces  of  silver,  and   cast 
them  to  the  potter  in  the   house   of  the  Lord.      Then  I  cut 
asunder  mine  other  staff,  even  Bands,  that  I  might  break  the 
brotherhood  between  Judah  and  Israel"  (Zech.  xi.  1-14).      It 
is  impossible  to  say  what  the  prophet  is  speaking  of,  but  at 
least  it  is  apparent  that  the  circumstances  he  puts  together  are 
not  applicable  to  the  act  of  Judas.      It  purports  to  be  a  time 
of  judgment  upon  the  Jews,  who  seem  referred  to  under  the 


1 


264 


PROPHECY. 


PROPHECY. 


265 


term  "  the  flock  of  the  slaughter."  The  judgment  is  expressed 
by  breaking  two  staves,  the  fracture  of  one  denoting  a  breach 
of  covenant  with  the  people,  and  that  of  the  other,  the  seve- 
rance of  Judah  and  Israel.  The  poor  of  the  flock  recognise  the 
word  of  the  Lord,  on  which  some  one  asks  for  his  price,  and  gets 
It ;  and  he  disposes  of  the  proceeds  under  divine  instruction. 
What  this  action  expresses,  is  not  discernible.  In  the  inci- 
dent of  Judas,  he  who  gets  the  pri^e  is  not  the  person  priced, 
as  m  Zechariah,  and  the  other  circumstances  introduced  and 
associated  with  this  pricing  by  the  prophet  are  wholly  wanting 
in  the  narrative  of  the  evangelist. 

STudII^°        $'*^-)  ^^*^^'  "^  ^ivi^g  liis  account  of  the  retributive  end  of 
Judas  Iscariot,  says  it  was  what  happened  in  fulfilment  of  that 
"  which  the  Holy  Ghost  by  the  mouth  of  David  spake  before 
concerning  Judas;— for  it  is  written  in  the   book  of  Psalms, 
Let  his  habitation  be  desolate,  and  let  no  man  dwell  therein  : 
and  his  bishoprick  let  another  take"   (Acts  i.  lG'-20)      The 
citations  are   of  Ps.  Ixix.  25,  and  cix,  8.      The    69th   Psalm, 
says  Dr  Davidson,  "  is  not  David's.      Some  righteous  sufferer 
living  m  the  time  of  the  Babylonish  captivity  speaks.      It  is 
not  Messianic."^     This  psalm  is  full  of  dreadful  imprecations, 
not  befitting  the  character  ascribed  to  Jesus,  and  the  utter- 
ances  are  those  of  one  entreating  for   deliverance   from    the 
hands  of  his  enemies,  in  a  tone,  and  with  a  lack  of  confidence 
m  the  issue,  which  do  not  accord  with   the  accounts  of  Jesus. 
Here  also  is  the  passage  to  the  effect  that  gall  and  vine-ar 
were  offered  to  the  sufferer  by  the  enemies  he  is  denouncing 
of  whom  he  adds,  "let  their  table  become  a  snare  before  them  '' 
"let  their  eyes  be  darkened;"  and  then  follow  the  words  Peter 
lays  hold  of  and  applies  to  Judas,  -  let  their  habitation  be 
desolate  ;  and  let  none  dwell  in  their  tents."    It  is  impossible, 
tairly,   when    many   persons    are    alluded    to    for    their    acts 
to  ascribe  the  whole  to  one  person  and  his  individual  act  \ 
nor   did   Judas   engage   in   giving   the    -gall   and   vinegar;" 
neither   is  his  particular   act   in   any  way   indicated    by  the 
Psalmist.      Of  the    109th  Psalm,  Dr  Davidson  equally  says  it 
'^was  not   written  by  David.      It  is  not  Messianic."^     TJiis 
Psalm  also  teems  with  awful  denunciations.     They  are  applied 
to  some  enemy,  -  because,"  it  is  stated   among  other  things, 
1  Introduction  to  tHe  Old  Testament,  II.  302.  a  Idem. 


sorrows. 


"  that  he  remembered  not  to  show  mercy,  but  persecuted  the 
poor  and  needy  man,  that  he  might  even  slay  the  broken  in 
heart."  This  is  not  in  keeping  with  the  circumstances  of 
Jesus  and  Judas,  nor  is  the  treachery  of  the  latter  in  any  way 
pointed  to.  The  apostle  has  laid  hold  of  some  phrases  of 
general  import  in  these  Psalms,  and  seeks  to  have  them  ac- 
cepted as  specially  prophetic. 

(46).     "He  is  despised    and   rejected  of  men;    a  man  of  The  man  of 
sorrows,  and  acquainted  with  grief, — He  was  oppressed,  and 
he  was  afflicted,  yet  he  opened  not  his  mouth  :   he  is  brought 
as  a  lamb  to  the  slaughter,  and  as  a  sheep  before  her  shearers 
is  dumb,  so  he  openeth  not  his  mouth"  (Isa.  liii.  3,  7);  a  pas- 
sage which,  when  read  to  him  by  the  eunuch,  Philip  applied  to 
Jesus  (Acts  viii.  32-35).      But  what  we  hear  of  the   life  of 
Jesus  little  warrants  the  application.      Begotten   of  God,  and 
incapable  of  sin,  the  essence  of  his  being  placed  him  immeasur- 
ably above    liability  to   the    sinking   infirmities    of  mankind. 
Angels  announced  and  celebrated  his  birth  with  songs  of  joy. 
As  he  grew  in  stature,  he  advanced  also  "  in  favour  with  God 
and   man"  (Luke  ii.  52).      The  Holy  Ghost  visibly  descended 
on  him,  and  a  voice  from  heaven  proclaimed  his  divine  origin. 
When  he  spoke,  *'  all  bare  him  witness,  and  wondered  at  the 
gracious    words    which   proceeded   out   of  his   mouth"   (Luke 
iv.  22).      When  he  taught,  it  was  as  "one  having  authority," 
the   people    being   "  astonished    at    his    doctrine"    (Matt.    vii. 
28,  29).      He  knew  that  the  lilies  of  the  field  were  clothed  by 
his  heavenly  Father;   that  the  ravens  depended  on  him  for 
their  food  (Luke  xii.  22-30);  that  not  a  sparrow  falls  to  the 
ground  without  him ;  and  that  the  very  hairs  of  the  head  are 
all  numbered   (Matt.  x.  29,  30)  ;    and  with    these   truths,    in 
the  plenitude  of  his  own  assurance,  he  sought  to  build  up  the 
faith  of  others.      For  himself,  he  was  placenl  above  the   reach 
of  any  want.      The  elements  obeyed  him  (Matt.  viii.  26,  27); 
evil  spirits  were  subject  to  him ;  diseases  vanished  at  his  touch ; 
food  was  generated  at  his  will;  and  the  dead  rose  to  life  at  his 
bidding.      The   omnipotent,  the  all-knowing,  could   have   had 
no  earthly  care,  or  fear,  or  sorrow.      In   the   consciousness   of 
his  own  resources,  and  the  certainty  of  the   issue   put  before 
him,  his  mission  was  calculated  to  elate  whatever  was  human 
about  him — not  to  depress  him.      It  was   one  of  measureless 


266 


PROPHECY. 


PROPHECY. 


importance  and  glory.      The  creation  lay  groaning  in  bondac^e 
(Rom.  viii.  21,  22),  and  the  Creator  was  in  no  condition  to 
apply  a  remedy  till  his  justice  had   first  been  satisfied  (Rom 
111.  26).      There  was  ''none    other  name  under  heaven  given 
among  men,"  whereby  they  could  be  saved,  but  the  name  of 
Jesus  (Acts  iv.  12).      Mankind  were  to  look  to  him  for  escape 
from  an  otherwise  inevitable  doom,  and  God    himself  was  de- 
pendent on  him  to  reinstate  his  rule,  and  recover  for  him  his 
lost  creation.      He  became  the  central  object  of  every  reo-ard 
and  m  the  position  he  had  assumed  as  Redeemer,  was  to  be 
['highly  exalted,"  and  to  have  a  name  given  to  him   -  which 
IS  above  every  name;   that  at  the  name  of  Jesus  every  knee 
should  bow,  of  things  in  heaven,   and    things    in    earth,   and 
things   under  the   earth  ;   and   that  every  tongue   should   con- 
less  that  Jesus  Christ  is  Lord,  to  the  glory  of  God  the  Father" 
(l^hil.  11.  9-11).      The  price  to-be  paid  for  these  great  results 
Avas  merely  death,  the  common  fate  of  that  race  of  man  whose 
lorm   he   had  adopted.      Many  undergo  it  in  circumstances  of 
far  greater  trial   than   he   endured;    and   he   had   more   than 
ordinary   support.       He   was    specially   strengthened    for    his 
sufferings  by  an  angel   from  heaven  (Luke  xxii.  43),  and,  as 
he  expired,  was  well  assured  that  the   next  moment  his  eves 
would  be  lifted   up  in  paradise  (Luke  xxiii.  43).      Multitudes 
of  mere  men  would  face  such  a  fate  as  his  with  fortitude  ;   and 
It  IS  to  attribute   to  him  a  weakness  which  would  make  him 
despicable,  to  suppose  that  the  prospect  of  death,  be   it  death 
on    the   cross,   overthrew  the    equanimity  of    his    mind,    and 
rendered  him  a  prey  to  habitual  sorrow.      It  will  be  said   that 
It  was  the  sense  and  burden  of  our  guilt  that  oppressed  him  • 
but   this   is   absolutely  incomprehensible.      The   burden,  what- 
ever It  was,  was  about  to  be  removed  with  six  hours'  exposure 
upon  the  cross;   nor  is  it  possible  to  conceive  that  an  innocent 
being,  able  with  confidence   in   his  expiring  moment  to  com- 
mend his   spirit  to   God  (Luke  xxiii.  46),  could    have  felt  the 
pressure  of  sms  that  were  not  his. 

If  then  what  we  are  told  of  Jesus,  of  his  being,  his  power 
his  mission,  and  hi^  hopes,  are  really  true  of  him,  it  is  hard  to 
discern  in  him  the  man  of  sorrows  and  griefs  depicted  by 
isaiah.  Neither  was  it  the  case  that  he  was  one  so  broken  in 
spirit  as  to  be  unequal  to  saying  a  word  on  his  own  behalf 


267 


On  the  contrary,  he  held  his  own  in  every  discussion,  proviu^y 
always  ready  and  able  to  put  others  in  the  wrong,  and  that  not 
in  the  gentlest  manner.  Intolerant  of  opposition,  he  said, 
"  He  that  is  not  with  me  is  against  me  ;  and  he  that  gathereth 
not  with  me  scattereth"  (Matt.  xii.  30).  And  he  applied  lan- 
guage to  his  adversaries  freely,  and  on  all  occasions,  of  a  sort 
that  few  could  tolerate.  "  0  generation  of  vipers,"  he  said  to 
the  Pharisees,  "  how  can  ye,  being  evil,  sp^k  good  things" 
(Matt.  xii.  34)  ?  "  Woe  unto  you,  scribes  and  Pharisees,  hypo- 
crites !— Woe  unto  you,  ye  blind  guides  !— Ye  fools  and  blind. 
— Ye  serpents,  ye  generation  of  vipers;"  expressions  often 
repeated,  with  much  virulence,  through  a  long  address 
(Matt,  xxiii.  13-33).  '^  Ye  are  of  your  father  the  devil,  and 
the  lusts  of  your  father  ye  will  do.  He  was  a  murderer  from 
the  beginning, — a  liar,  and  the  father  of  it"  (John  viii.  44). 
Here,  at  all  events,  he  was  not  bearing  the  sins  of  others,  or 
sinking  under  the  weight  of  their  guilt,  but  was  casting  the 
burden,  very  determinately,  where  it  should  naturally  lie,  upon 
the  transgressors  themselves. 

In  the  further  portion  of  the  same  prophecy  it  is  said, 
"  When  thou  shalt  make  his  soul  an  offering  for  sin,  he  shall 
see  his  seed,  he  shall  prolong  his  days,  and  the  pleasure  of  the 
Lord  shall  prosper  in  his  hand.  He  shall  see  of  the  travail  of 
his  soul,  and  shall  be  satisfied. — Therefore  will  I  divide  him  a 
portion  with  the  great,  and  he  shall  divide  the  spoil  with 
the  strong,"  circumstances  certainly  not  fulfilled  in  respect  of 
Jesus. 

(47).    "As  Moses  lifted  up  the  serpent  in  the  wilderness.  Predictions 
even  so  must  the  Son  of  man  be  lifted  up:     that  whosoever  hfsderth.''^ 
believeth    in    him    should    not  perish,   but  have  eternal  life" 
(John  iii.  14,  15).      ''Then  said  Pilate  unto  them.  Take  ye 
him,  and  judge  him  according  to  your  law.      The  Jews  there- 
fore said   unto  him.  It  is  not  lawful  for  us  to  put  any  man  to 
death  :  That  the  saying  of  Jesus  might  be  fulfilled,  which  he 
spake,    signifying   what    death    he    should    die"    (John    xviii. 
31,32).     "  But  last  of  all,"  Jesus  said,  in  narrating  a  parable, 
"  he  sent  unto  them  his  son,  saying.  They  will  reverence  my 
son.    But  when  the  husbandmen  saw  the  son,  they  said  amonor 
themselves,  This  is  the  heir  ;  come,  let  us  kill  him,  and  let  us 
seize  on  his  inheritance.     And  they  caught  him,  and  cast  him 


f 


208 


PROPHECY. 


PROPHECY. 


269 


The  brazen 
serpent. 


The 

rejected 
corner 
stone. 


out  of  the  vineyard,  and  slew  him. — Did  ye  never  read  in  the 
scriptures,  The  stone  which  the  builders  rejected,  the  same  is 
become  the  head  of  the  corner :  this  is  the  Lord's  doing,  and 
it  is  marvellous  in  our  eyes"  (Matt.  xxi.  37-42)?  ''Then 
saith  Jesus  unto  them.  All  ye  shall  be  offended  because  of  me 
this  night :  for  it  is  written,  I  will  smite  the  shepherd,  and  the 
sheep  of  the  flock  shall  be  scattered  abroad.  But  after  I 
am  risen  again,  I  will  go  before  you  into  Galilee"  (Matt, 
xxvi.  31,  32). 

These  are  instances  wherein  Jesus  is  represented  to  have 
foretold  his  own  death,  and  the  manner  of  it.  It  must  ever  be 
remembered  that  the  narratives  havinnr  been  written  after  the 
event,  the  statements  do  not  come  before  us  in  the  power  of 
prophecies.  If  Jesus  really  made  such  declarations,  they  were 
prophetic  to  those  who  heard  them.  To  us  the  sayings  form 
merely  portions  of  the  whole  narrative,  their  credibility  de- 
pending upon  the  reliance  we  may  be  able  to  place  in  the 
narrators. 

Jesus  was  to  be  lifted  up  as  the  serpent  in  the  wilderness, 
and  to  carry  out  the  type  he  underwent  the  Roman  punish- 
ment of  the  crucifix.  But  there  is  a  marked  distinction 
between  the  type  and  the  antitype.  The  former  worked 
physically.  The  sufferers  were  such  in  the  flesh,  and  their 
eyes  had  to  look  upon  the  object  that  was  to  effect  their 
deliverance.  It  was  fitting,  therefore,  that  this  object  should 
be  exposed  conspicuously  to  their  sight.  But  the  work  of 
Jesus  was  altogether  spiritual.  The  mind  of  any  looking  to 
him  for  deliverance  was  to  be  exercised  over  the  fact  of  his 
death.  The  method,  or  accessories  of  it,  could  signify  nothing. 
Accordingly,  differing  from  the  treatment  of  the  serpent,  he 
was  speedily  taken  down  from  the  cross,  his  exposure  upon  it 
expressing  nothing. 

Jesus  was  also  likened  to  a  stone  rejected  by  the  builders, 
but  which  became  the  head  of  the  corner.  The  passage  re- 
ferred to  stands  thus.  ''  I  called  upon  the  Lord  in  distress  : 
the  Lord  answered  me,  and  set  me  in  a  large  place.  The 
Lord  is  on  my  side,  I  will  not  fear  ;  what  can  man  do  unto 
me  ? — Thou  hast  thrust  sore  at  me  that  I  might  fall  ;  but  the 
Lord  helped  me. — The  Lord  hath  chastened  me  sore  ;  but  he 
hath  not  given  me  over  unto  death. — I  will  praise  thee  ;  for 


thou  hast  heard  me,  and  art  become  my  salvation.      The  stone 
which  the  builders  refused  is  become  the  head  of  the  corner. 
This  is  the  Lord's  doing  ;  it  is  marvellous  in  our  eyes.      This 
is  the  day  which  the  Lord  hath  made  ;  we  will  rejoice  and  be 
glad  in    it.      Save   now,  I   beseech   thee,  O  Lord  ;  0  Lord,  I 
beseech  thee,  send  now  prosperity  "  (Ps.  cxviii.  5-25).      These 
are  evidently  the  outpourings  of  a  man  who  has  been  brought 
through    ordinary  tribulation.      He  has   been  in   distress,  and 
cried  for  help.      God  had  chastened   him,  but  spared  his  life, 
and  eventually  made  him   the  head    over  those  who  had   re- 
jected him.      The  parallel  in   the  case  of  Jesus  is  not  a  close 
one,  and  until   he  is  seen  made  head  of  the  corner   it   is   in- 
complete.     The  statement  involved  is  that  he  was  offered   as 
a  corner  stone   to  the   builders,  who  would   not   accept  him  as 
such.      In  other  words,  that  he  presented  himself  to  the  Jews 
as  their  Messiah,  the  reconstructor  of  their  nation,  the  corner- 
stone or  foundation  of  their  stability  as  a  people  ;  and  as  such 
was  rejected.      The  question  occurs,  did  Jesus  present  himself 
in  this  aspect  to  the  Jews  ?     And  it  can  be  answered  only  in 
one  way.      He  came,  it  is  said,  with  "  no  form  nor  comeliness," 
with  '*  no  beauty  "  that  they  "  should  desire    him  ;  "  and  not 
as   a  king,  but  as  "  a  servant."      Could   any   people   be  ex- 
pected to  receive  one  appearing  to  them  in  this  guise  as  their 
stay  and  foundation,  the   prop   of  their  strength,  the  corner 
stone  of  their  prosperity  ?     In  fact,  he  give  them  no  oppor- 
tunity of  accepting  him  in  any  capacity.      When  he  was  dis- 
covered  to   be   the  Christ,  he   strictly  enjoined   the   parties, 
whether  men  or  spirits,  not  to  reveal  the  fact.     As  what  then, 
save  as  some  other  than  the  Christ,  did  he  offer  himself  to 
their  notice  ?     True,  he  wrought  miracles  ;  but  it  is  no  where 
said  that  the  Messiah  was  to  commend  himself  as  a  wonder- 
worker ;  and   how  can  the  Jews   be   charged  with  having  re- 
jected such  testimony,  when  their  eyes  were  purposely  blinded 
against  perceiving  it  ?     The  parable,  moreover,  in  which  this 
saying  of  the   rejected   corner-stone  is   introduced,  is   not   in 
keeping  with  the  circumstances  of  the  case.      In  the  parable 
the  son  of  the  lord  of  the  vineyard  is  sent  by  him  to  the 
husbandmen,  who  kill  him  in  order  to  "  seize  on  his  inheri- 
tance ;  "  but  Jesus  did  not  disclose  to  the  Jews  his  proper 
position  in  this  sonship  ;  nor  had  he,  to  their  knowledge,  any 


270 


PKOPHECY. 


The 

smitten 

ihepherd. 


inheritance   to  be  coveted  ;    nor  could  their   compassing  his 
death  possibly  put  them  in  possession  of  anything. 

Jesus   also    applied    to   himself   a    passage   speaking   of  a 
shepherd   who  was   smitten   and   his   sheep  scattered.      It  is 
this.      ''  In  that  day  there  shall  be   a  fountain  opened   to  the 
house  of  David  and  to  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem,  for  sin 
and  for  uncleanness.      And  it  shall  come  to  pass  in  that  day, 
saith  the  Lord  of  hosts,  that  I  will  cut  off  the  names  of  the 
idols  out  of  the  land,  and  they  shall  no  more  be  remembered. — 
And  it  shall  come  to  pass  in  that  day  that  the  prophets  shall 
be  ashamed  every  one  of  his  vision,  when  he  hath  prophesied  ; 
neither  shall  they  wear  a  rough  garment  to  deceive  :  but  he 
shall  say,  I   am  no  prophet,  I  am  an   husbandman ;   for  man 
taught  me  to  keep  cattle  from  my  youth.      And  one  shall  say 
unto  him,  What  are  these  wounds  in  thine  hands  ?      Then  he 
shall  answer,  Those  with  which  I  was  wounded  in    the   house 
of  my  friends.      Awake,  0  sword,  against  my  shepherd   and 
against  the  man  that  is  my  fellow,  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts  : 
smite  the  shepherd,  and  the  sheep  shall  be  scattered  ;   and  I 
will  turn  mine  hand  upon  the  little  ones.     And  it  shall  come 
to  pass,  that  in  all  the  land,  saith  the  Lord,  two  parts  therein 
shall  be  cut  off  and  die  ;  but  the  third  shall  be  left  therein. 
And  I  will   bring   the   third   part  through  the   fire,   and   will 
refine  them  as   silver  is  refined,  and  will   try  them  as  gold  is 
tried  :   they  shall   call  on  my  name,  and   I  will  hear  them  ;   I 
will  say.  It  is   my  people  ;   and  they  shall  say,  The   Lord   is 
my  God"  (Zech.  xiii.  1-9).      It  is  impossible  to  say  of   what 
day,  or  what  circumstances,  the  prophet  spoke  ;  but  it  is  clear 
that  the   particulars  introduced  by  him  do  not  relate  to  the 
day  of  Jesus.      If  a  fountain  for  washing  away  sin  was  then 
opened  in  Jerusalem,  it  was  not  revealed  to   its   inhabitants. 
The  Jews  had  long  before  disconnected   themselves  with  the 
sin  pointed  to,    of  idolatry.      Prophesying   was  not   discoun- 
tenanced, but  every  effort  has  been  made,  as  has   been  seen, 
to  connect   Jesus   with   the   sayings    of   prophets.     He    him- 
self  exercised  the  prophetic  gift  and  passed    it  on  to  his  fol- 
lowers.     If  there  were  wounds  on   his  hands,  there  were  also 
such  on  his  feet,  which  are  unmentioned  ;  nor  can    these   be 
said  to  have  occurred   to   him,  when   nailed   to   the    Roman 
crucifix,  "  in  the  house  of  his  friends."     The  wounds   spoken 


PROPHECY. 


271 


of  by  Zechariah,  if  upon  his  "  shepherd,"  were  inflicted 
otherwise,  by  the  "  sword."  He  speaks,  apparently,  of  some 
leader  who  is  struck  down  and  his  people  dispersed.  The 
people,  obviously,  are  the  Jews,  of  whom  two-thirds  were  to 
be  "cut  off  and  die,"  and  one-third  to  be  spared,  and  brought 
to  the  knowledge  of  God.  The  Jews  cannot  be  represented 
as  the  sheep  of  Jesus,  seeing  they  have  never  had  knowledf^e 
of  him  as  their  shepherd.  They  formed  no  gathering  under 
his  leadership  to  be  scattered  when  he  was  cut  down.  Nor 
were  two-thirds  of  them  put  to  death,  and  one-third  saved 
and  converted.  As  a  body  they  rejected  Jesus  then,  and 
still  do  so. 

(48).  ''And  about  the  ninth  hour  Jesus  cried  with  a  loud  My  God, 
voice,  saying,  Eli,  Eli,  lama  Sabachthani  ?  that  is  to  say,  my  ™^  ^jj^'^ 
God,  my  God,  why  hast  thou  forsaken  me  ?  "  (Matt,  xxvii.  46).  thoufor- 
This  exclamation,  said  to  have  been  uttered  by  Jesus  on  the  ^°  ™^ ' 
cross,  is  taken  from  an  earlier  scripture.  ''  My  God,  my  God, 
why  hast  thou  forsaken  me  ?  why  art  thou  so  far  from  helping 
me,  and  from  the  words  of  my  roaring  ?  0  my  God,  I  cry  in 
the  day-time,  but  thou  hearest  not ;  and  in  the  night  season, 
and  am  not  silent.  But  thou  art  holy,  0  thou  that  inhabitest 
the  praises  of  Israel.  Our  fathers  trusted  in  thee  ;  they 
trusted,  and  thou  didst  deliver  them.  They  cried  unto  thee, 
and  were  delivered  ;  they  trusted  in  thee,  and  were  not  con- 
founded. But  I  am  a  worm,  and  no  man  ;  a  reproach  of  men, 
and  despised  of  the  people.  All  they  that  see  me  laugh  me 
to  scorn  :  they  shoot  out  the  lip,  they  shake  the  head,  saying, 
He  trusted  on  the  Lord  that  he  would  deliver  him  ;  let  him 
deliver  him,  seeing  he  delighted  in  him.  But  thou  art  he 
that  took  me  out  of  the  womb ;  thou  didst  make  me  hope 
when  I  was  upon  my  mother's  breasts.  I  was  cast  upon  thee 
from  the  womb  :  thou  art  my  God  from  my  mother's  belly. 
Be  not  far  from  me,  for  trouble  is  near,  for  there  is  none  to 
help.  Many  bulls  have  compassed  me  ;  strong  bulls  of  Baslian 
have  beset  me  round.  They  gaped  upon  me  with  their 
mouths,  as  a  ravening  and  a  roaring  lion.  I  am  poured  out 
like  water,  and  all  my  bones  are  out  of  joint  :  my  heart  is 
like  wax  ;  it  is  melted  in  the  midst  of  my  bowels.  My 
strength  is  dried  up  like  a  potsherd,  and  my  tongue  cleaveth 


272 


PROPHECY. 


to  my  jaws  ;   and   thou  hast   brought   me  into   the   dust   of 
death"  (Ps.  xxii.  1-15). 

Jesus  is  represented  making  the  exclamation  in  question  in 
anguish  of  soul,  seeking  for  escape  from  his  cruel  fate.  He 
had  previously  betrayed  the  same  desire  in  his  prayer  in  the 
garden,  saying,  "  0  my  Father,  if  it  be  possible,  let  this  cup 
pass  from  me  "  (Matt.  xxvi.  39)  ;  or,  as  it  is  also  put,  "  Abba, 
Father,  all  things  are  possible  unto  thee  ;  take  away  this 
cup  from  me  "  (Mark  xiv.  3G),  the  entreaty,  however,  con- 
cluding with  the  expression  of  submission  to  the  Father's  will. 
But  how  does  this  evidence  of  a  wish,  if  possible,  to  avoid  the 
task  he  had  undertaken,  consist  with  the  nature  of  the  task 
and  the  circumstances  in  which  he  came  to  its  fulfilment  ? 
The  object  was  the  deliverance  of  the  world,  to  be  wrought 
out  in  this  manner  only.  The  first  Adam  had  plunged  the 
whole  race  in  guilt  and  its  consequences  ;  the  second  Adam 
came  forward  for  their  redemption  (1  Cor.  xv.  21,  22,  45-49). 
"  Through  death,"  he  had  to  ''  destroy  him  that  had  the 
power  of  death,  that  is,  (as  it  is  alleged,)  the  devil  "  (Heb. 
ii.  14).  At  the  last  moment  he  is  seen  to  flinch  from  the 
suffering  to  be  incurred.  What  if  his  prayer  had  been  granted, 
and  his  life  spared  to  him  ?  He  had  said  to  God,  on  another 
occasion,  "  I  know  that  thou  hearest  me  always  "  (John  xi. 
42).  What  if  he  had  heard  him  then?  What  would  have 
become  of  the  unredeemed  race,  with  the  triumph  of  Satan 
over  the  Creator  left  undisturbed,  and  complete,  in  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  creation  ? 

But  it  elsewhere  appears  that  Jesus,  being  a  divine  per- 
sonage, had  the  power  of  his  life  in  his  own  hands.  "  No 
man,"  he  said,  "  taketh  it  from  me,  but  I  lay  it  down  of  my- 
self I  have  power  to  lay  it  down,  and  I  have  power  to  take 
it  again"  (John  x.  18).  He  was,  therefore,  not  brought 
under  the  necessity  of  uttering  the  piteous  cry  attributed  to 
him.  If  he  really  felt  his  position  on  the  cross  too  painful  a 
one  to  be  endured,  he  had  the  remedy  in  his  own  hands, 
without  need  of  raising  a  beseeching  prayer  for  deliverance. 
It  was  as  if  one  of  us  were  marching  to  a  precipice.  We 
should  be  under  no  need  to  throw  ourselves  over  it,  or  to  call 
upon  God  to  save  us  from  such  a  catastrophe.  W^e  should 
merely  have  to   exercise   the  power  already  conferred   on  us, 


PROPHECY. 


273 


and   turn  aside  or  retrace   our  steps.     And   so   might  Jesus 

sented  '  ''''    ""^  ^''''^^  ^^  '"^   ^''   '^'''^  "^  '^^'^' 

The  utterance,  however,  as  it  stands  in  the  original  has  no 
proper  application  to  the  circumstances  of  Jesus  It  is  the 
cry  of  a  mere  man,  reduced  to  extremity,  and  earnestly  be- 
seechmg  God  for  that  deliverance  which  he  had  no  power  of 
working  out  for  himself.  He  had  a  feeling  of  being  forsaken 
by  God,  which  It  IS  impossible  to  impute  to  Jesus,  if  himself 
God.  He  had  cned,  he  said,  in  the  day-time,  but  God  heard 
him  not  and  in  the  night  season.  This  condition  of  calling 
night  and  day  upon  God  for  help  was  assuredly  not  that  of 
Jesus,  who  hung  but  six  hours  upon  the  cross  when  his  life 
lett  him.      The  suffering  Psalmist  shows  all  the  infirmity  of  a 

"^r?  ^nTl  Tf^""''.     ^'  ^"^^^^  "P  ^^'  «^^^i-^  ^-ith  with 
what  God  had    done  for  others  of  his  race.       -  Our   fathers 

trusted  in  thee  "  he  said  ;   "  they  trusted,  and  thou  didst  de- 
hver  them.       And  for  himself,  God  had  brought  him  into  the 
world,  and  had  sustained  him  in   his   helpless  infancy       Then 
he  entreats  God  to  be  still  near  him,  quailing  at  the  strenPth 
and  number  of  his  ad versafies- the   many  bulls   of  Bashan 
the  ravening  and  roaring  lions.      The  sense  of  his  perils  appals 
him;  he  feels  himself  poured  out  like  water,  with  his  bones 
out  of  joint,  and  his  heart  melting  within  him  like  wax      The 
whole  description   must  be  taken  into  account ;  and  certainly 
It  does  not  agree  with  what  we  are  taught  to  believe  of  Jesus 
The  words  of  the  earthly  supplicant  have   been  put  into   his 
mouth  to   establish  a  prophetic  position,  without  thought  of 
their  incongruity.  ° 

■  ^,*  V,  "  ■^°''  '1*'^'  ^'''''^  compassed  me  :  the  assembly  of  the  Thev 
wicked  have  inclosed  me:  they  pierced  my  hands  and  my  feet    P--<"Jmy 
I  may  tell  all  my  bones  :  they  look  and  stare  upon  me  "  (Ps'  w  t^ 
XXII.  10,  10.      This  IS  a  continuation  of  the  same  outpourings 

If  we  turn,  says  Dr  Adler,  "  to  the  Hebrew  oriLal  ^e 
look  in  vain  for  a  word  corresponding  to  '  they  pierced  '  "  His 
translation  is  "  For  dogs  have  compassed  me  ;  the  assembly  of 
the  wicked  have  enclosed  me ;  like  a  lion  (they  tearl  mv 
hands  and  my  feet.-  That  Jesus  was  the  emaciated  object 
described  in  the  psaJm  is  assuredly  not  apparent.     We  hear  of 

'  Adler's  Sermons,  72-74. 
S 


274 


PROPHECY. 


him  repeatedly  at  entertainments  offered  him,  living  as  others, 
insomuch  that  he  incurred  the  reproach  of  being  "  gluttonous 
and  a  wine  bibber  "  (Matt.  xi.  19).      He  was  thus  engaged  at 
the  house  of  Martha  and  Mary  within  a  few  days  of  his  death 
(John  xii.  2).      He  inculcated  absence  of  thought  or  care  for 
the  morrow,  and  could  have  had  none  himself.      He  was  able 
to  produce  food  at  will  for  multitudes  in  a  desert  place,  and  to 
pay  his  dues  with  money  out  of  a  fish's  mouth.      He   could 
have  suffered  no  personal  want;  and  as  he  healed  every  manner 
of  sickness  with  a  word  or  a  touch,  must  have  been  without 
disease  himself.     And  when  he  expired  it  was  with  the  ''  loud 
voice"  of  one  in  vigour  of  strength. 
Parting  his        (50.)   "Then  the  soldiers,  when  they  had  crucified  Jesus, 
garments.     ^^^^  ^I'ls  garments,  and  made  four  parts,  to  every  soldier  a  part; 
and  also  his  coat :  now  the  coat  was  without  seam,  w^oven  from 
the  top  throughout.      They  said  therefore  among  themselves. 
Let  us  not  rend  it,  but  cast  lots  for  it,  whose  it  shall  be  :  that 
the  scripture  might  be  fulfilled,  which  saith,  They  parted  my 
raiment  among  them,  and  for  my  vesture  they  did  cast  lots. 
These  things,  therefore,  the  soldiers  did"  (John  xix.  23,  24). 
The  prophecy  referred  to  is  in  the  psalm  already  under  con- 
sideration.     ''They  part  my  garments  among  them,  and  cast 
lots  upon  my  vesture.     But  be  not  thou  far  from  me,  0  Lord: 
0  my  strength,  haste  thee  to  help  me.      Deliver  my  soul  from 
the  sword  ;  my  darling  from  the  power  of  the  dog.      Save  me 
from  the  lion's  mouth"   (Ps.  xxii.  18-21).      The  Psalmist  was 
not  absolutely  given  over  to  destruction.      However  imminent 
his  danger,  he  had  still  hope  of  escape.     What  he  feared  was 
the  "sword"  of  his  enemies,   and   the   "power"  of  those  he 
designated    dogs.       Such    was    not    the    condition    of   Jesus, 
nailed  upon  the  cross,  and  actually  undergoing  all  that  those 
who  wished  him  ill  could  bring  upon  him.      The  narrative,  we 
must  always  remember,  may  easily  receive  the  degree  of  asso- 
ciation  with   the   prophecy    we  witness,    by  the    citation    of 
corresponding  incidents,  without  regard  to  the  real  bearings 
and  subject  of  the  prophetic  annunciation.     That  the  evangelist 
has,  on  the  present  occasion,  been  guilty  of  shaping  facts  to 
correspond  with  prophecy,  is  apparent.      He  does  not  see  that 
the   "garments"   and  the   "vesture"  signify  the  same  thing, 
this  being  an  instance  of  emphasising  by  reiteration,  as  in  the 


PROPHECY. 


275 


case  of  the  "ass  "  and  the  "colt,  the  foal  of  an  ass."  Matthew 
to  realize  his  sense  of  the  phraseology,  did  not  hesitate  to  in- 
troduce two  asses,  the  dam  and  its  foal;  and  so  now  John  to 
carry  out  his  reading,  scruples  not  to  discriminate  between  the 
"  garments  "  and  the  "  vesture,"  assigning  a  separate  action 
for  each.  And  as  the  other  evangelists,  not  falling  into  the 
error  of  Matthew,  described  but  one  ass  involved,  so  now 
the  remaining  evangelists  keep  clear  of  John's  mistake  by 
statmg  that  the  lots  were  cast  for  the  whole  of  the  apparel 
together.  "  They  parted,"  it  is  said,  "  his  garments,  cast- 
mg  lots  upon  them,  what  every  man  should  take"  fMark 
XV.  24).^  ^ 

(51.)  After  this,  Jesus  knowing  that  all  things  were  now 
accomplished,  that  the  scripture  might   be  fulfilled,  saith,  I 
thirst.      Now  there  was  set  a  vessel  full  of  vinegar :  and  they 
filled  a  spunge  with  vinegar,  and  put  it  upon  hyssop,  and  put 
It   to  his  mouth.      When   Jesus   therefore   had  received    the 
vinegar,  he  said.  It  is  finished  :  and  he  bowed  his  head,  and 
gave  up  the  ghost"  (John  xix.  28-30).     The  scripture  referred 
to  IS  this.      -  Save  me,  0  God  ;  for  the  waters  are  come  in 
unto  my  soul.      I  sink  in  deep  mire,  where  there  is  no  stand- 
mg :  I  am  come  into  deep  waters,  where  the  floods  overflow 
me.      I  am  weary  of  my  crying :  my  throat  is  dried  :  mine 
eyes  fail  while  I  wait  for  my  God.— 0  God,  thou  knowest  my 
foolishness;  and  my  sins  are  not  hid  from  thee.— I  am  become 
a  stranger  unto  my  brethren,  and  an  alien  unto  my  mother's 
children.      When  I  wept,  and  chastened  my  soul  with  fasting, 
that  was  to  my  reproach.     I  made  sackcloth  also  my  garment! 
—and  I  was  the  song  of  drunkards.— Deliver  me  out  of  the 
mire,  and  let  me  not  sink. — Let  not  the  water-flood  overflow 
me,  neither  let  the  deep  swallow  me  up,  and  let  not  the  pit 
shut  her  mouth  upon  me.— Hide  not  thy  face  from  thy  ser- 
vant ;  for  I  am  in  trouble  :   hear  me  speedily.      Draw  nigh 
unto  my  soul,  and  redeem  it :   deliver  me    because    of  mine 
enemies. — Reproach  hath  broken  my  heart ;  and  I  am  full  of 
heaviness  :  and  I  looked  for  some  to  take  pity,  but  there  was 
none  ;  and  for  comforters,  but  I  found  none.      They  gave  me 
also  gall  for  my  meat ;  and  in  my  thirst  they  gave  me^  vinegar 
to  drink.      Let  their  table  become  a  snare  before  them :  and 

1  Strauss'  Ngw  Life  of  Jesus,  II.  371,  372. 


I  thirst. 


276 


PROPHECY. 


that  which  should  have  been  for  their  welfare,  let  it  become  a 

trap. Pour  out  thine  indignation  upon  them,  and  let  thy 

wrathful  anger  take  hold  of  them. — For  they  persecute  him 
whom  thou  hast  smitten  ;  and  they  talk  to  the  grief  of  those 
whom  thou  hast  wounded.  Add  iniquity  unto  their  iniquity  : 
and  let  them  not  come  into  thy  righteousness.  Let  them  be 
blotted  out  of  the  book  of  the  living,  and  not  be  written  with 
the  righteous"  (Ps.  Ixix.  1-28). 

The  picture  here  given  cannot  be  a  representation  of  Jesus. 
It  is  that  of  a  poor  suffering  mortal,  weak  in  faith,  overcome 
by  a  sense  of  his  sinfulness,  and  striving  with  difficulty  to 
realize  the  presence  of  God,  and  his  supporting  power.  He 
had  become  an  outcast  from  his  own  kindred.  He  had  chas- 
tened his  soul  with  fasting,  and  mortified  himself  by  clothing 
himself  in  sackcloth.  He  trembled  at  the  thought  of  the 
bottomless  pit,  and  called  upon  God  to  draw  near  to  his  soul 
and  redeem  it.  He  was  oppressed  by  reproaches  heaped  upon 
him,  and  the  absence  of  comforters.  He  still  hoped  for 
deliverance,  and  called  for  vengeance  on  his  persecutors,  whom 
he  consigned  to  everlasting  perdition. 

Jesus  was  never  in  this  abject  state.  He  was  himself  sin- 
less, and  had  God  ever  with  him.  He  was  the  son  ''  in  the 
bosom  of  the  Father  "  (John  i.  1 8).  He  and  the  Father  were 
"  one  "  (John  x.  30).  Whoever  had  seen  him,  had  "  seen  the 
Father  "  (John  xiv.  9).  He  was  no  outcast,  but  mixed  freely 
with  those  around  him,  partaking  of  their  hospitalities.  Nor 
was  he  disowned  by  his  kindred,  who  interested  themselves  in 
him  (Matt.  xii.  47  ;  xiii.  55,  56).  To  fasting  he  was  not  ad- 
dicted, but  discouraged  the  practice  in  his  own  day.  "Why," 
he  was  asked,  "  do  the  disciples  of  John  fast  often, — but  thine 
eat  and  drink."  To  which  he  replied,  "Can  ye  make  the 
children  of  the  bridechamber  fast,  while  the  bridegroom  is  with 
them  ?  But  the  days  will  come,  when  the  bridegroom  shall 
be  taken  away  from  them,  and  then  shall  they  fast  in  those 
days"  (Luke  v.  33-35).  His  presence  was  thus  to  be  a  signal  of 
joy,  not  of  mortification  and  dejection.  Nor  was  sackcloth,  the 
type  of  woe,  his  clothing.  The  fear  of  the  pit  was  not  upon 
him.  "  To  day,"  he  could  confidently  say  to  the  dying  thief 
by  his  side,  "  shalt  thou  be  with  me  in  paradise."  Whatever 
reproaches  he  may  have  endured,  the  sense  thereof,  could  have 


PROPHECY. 


277 


weighed  little  with  him  in  these  his  last  moments.  Nor  did 
he  seek  for  vengeance  upon  his  enemies,  and  least  of  all  for 
their  eternal  damnation.  He  had  come  to  save  all  mankind, 
and  in  this  his  death  sacrificed  himself  for  them.  His  last 
words  consequently  were  in  intercession  for  those  who  had 
brought  him  to  this  pass.  "  Father,  forgive  them,"  he  said ; 
*'  for  they  know  not  what  they  do."  And  so,  in  peaceful  con- 
fidence, he  yielded  up  his  life,  saying,  "  Father,  into  thy  hands 
I  commend  my  spirit  "  (Luke  xxiii.  34,  46).  In  every  respect 
he  stands  in  contrast  to  the  faint-hearted,  erring,  and  vengeful 
Psalmist. 

(52.)   "  These  things  were  done  that  the  scriptures  should  a  bone  of 
be  fulfilled,  a  bone  of  him  shall  "  not  be  broken  "  (John  xix.  ^fCken. 
36).      There  is  no   such  passage  affecting   the  Messiah.      The 
reference  is  doubtless  to  the  rule  respecting  the  paschal  lamb. 
*'  In  one  house  shall  it  be  eaten  ;  thou  shalt  not  carry  forth 
ought  of  the  flesh  abroad  out  of  the  house  ;  neither  shall  ye 
break  a  bone   thereof"  (Ex.  xii.  46).      The   circumstances  of 
the   two  events  altogether  differ,  although   the    representation 
of  the  paschal  sacrifice  is  claimed  for  Jesus  (I  Cor.  v.  7).      He 
suffered    as    a    criminal  ;    his    executioners    were    the    pagan 
Romans  ;  no  ceremonial  rite  was   associated  with   his  death  ; 
and   his   body,  not  seen  to  be  that  of  a  victim   offered  up  at 
any  shrine,  was  committed  to  the  grave  as  an  ordinary  corpse. 
The  mere  circumstance  of  the  non-breaking  of  his  bones,  in 
the  absence  of  every  other  needed  feature  of  correspondence, 
ill  suffices  to  present  him  as  undergoing  an  end  prefigured  by 
the  paschal  lamb. 

(53.)   ''  For  it  is  not  possible  that  the  blood  of  bulls   and  of  The 
goats  should  take  away  sins.      Wherefore  when  he  coraeth  into  ^^^  ^ 
the  world,  he  saith,   sacrifice  and  offering  thou  wouldest  not, 
but  a  body  hast  thou  prepared  me  :  in  burnt   offerings  and 
sacrifices  for  sin  thou  hast  had  no  pleasure.      Then  said  I,  Lo, 
I  come  (in  the  volume  of  the  book  it  is  written  of  me,)  to  do 
thy  will,  0  God  "  (Heb.  x.  4-7).      This,  the  apostle  says,  was 
a  representation  of  the  sacrifice  which  Jesus  made  of  himself 
for  the  sins  of  mankind,  in  order  to  "  sanctify  "  them  to  God. 
The  passage  is  taken  from  Ps.  xl.  6-8.      "  Sacrifice  and  offer- 
ing thou  didst  not  desire  ;  mine  ears  hast  thou  opened  :  burnt 
offering  and  sin  offering  hast  thou  not  required.      Then  said  I, 


278 


PROPHECY. 


PROPHECT. 


279 


The 

sacrificial 

types. 


Lo,  I  come  :  in  the  volume  of  the  book  it  is  written  of  me,  I 
delight  to  do  thy  will,  0  my  God  :  yea,  thy  law  is  within  my 
heart.      I  have  preached  righteousness  in  the  great  congrega- 
tion :  lo,  I  have  not  refrained  my  lips,  O  Lord,  thou  knowest." 
The  Psalmist  is  one  of  the  human  family,  who  could  say  of 
himself,  truthfully,   it  must  be  assumed,   in  the  workings  of 
genuine  repentance,  "mine  iniquities  have  taken  hold  upon  me, 
so  that  I  am  not  able  to  look  up ;  they  are  more  than  the 
hairs  of  mine  head  :  therefore  my  heart  faileth  me."      This 
could  not  be  the  condition  of  Jesus,  who  was  sinless.      Nor  is 
the  position  described  that  of  one,  who,  in  the  consciousness  of 
the  inefficacy  of  all   other  sacrifices,   came  forward  with   the 
offering  of  his  own  blood.     The  "body  hast  thou  prepared  me," 
for  the  end  of  this  human  sacrifice,  is  not  in  the  original.     The 
apostle  has  cited  as  written  what  is  not  written,  in  order  to 
make  the  passage  bear  the  meaning  he  imputes  to  it.     Neither 
is  there  any  note  that  the  utterance  of  the  Psalmist  was  made 
"when  he  cometh  into  the  world,"  as  if  he  had   come  in  dif- 
ferently from  others  of  the  human  race,  and  specially  to  offer 
up  this  sacrifice.      The  Psalmist,  in  point  of  fact,  recognizes  in 
God  an  absolute  aversion  to  sacrifice  of  any  kind.      "  Sacrifice 
and  offering,"  he  says,  "thou  didst  not  desire  : — burnt  offering 
and  sin   offering  hast  thou  not  required."      He  disallows  the 
whole  Jewish  sacrificial  system,  (if  indeed  he  knew  anything  of 
it,)  as  what  was  not  of  God, — neither  proceeding  from  his  wish, 
nor  of  his  ordipation  ;  and  in  thus  exhibiting  God  as  averse  to 
all  sacrifice,   he   equally  shows  that  it  would  be  against   his 
mind  to  authorize  or  accept  such  a  sacrifice  as  that  of  Jesus, 
for  which  the  apostle,  nevertheless,  has  claimed  from  him  pro- 
phetic recognition  and  support.      What  the  Psalmist  does  dis- 
close is  that  all  that  God  requires  of  a  sinner  is  the  submission 
of  his  heart  and  will  to  him,  but  this  representation  not  suiting 
the  doctrine  the  apostle  was  aiming  to  enforce,  he  refrains  from 
producing  it. 

The  idea  that  the  sacrificial  usages  which  are  said  to  have 
prevailed  from  the  foundation  of  the  world,  beginning  with 
the  blood  offering  of  Abel,  were  typical  of  the  death  of  Jesus, 
cannot  be  properly  sustainable,  where,  as  in  his  case,  there  was 
neither  altar,  priest,  worshipper,  or  employment  of  the  sacrificial 
knife,   to   fulfil  the  resemblance.      The  slaughter  of  innocent 


1 


animals  to  appease  their  divinities  prevailed  in  all  heathendom. 
The  very  rites  observed  by  the  champion  of  the  true  God,  Elijah, 
were  those  practised  by  his  opponents  the  priests  of  Baal.  If 
the  Jews  obtained  their  form  of  worship  from  a  divine  source, 
from  whence  could  the  followers  of  Baal  have  had  theirs  ? 
And  if  it  be  the  case  that  these  Jewish  sacrifices  pointed  to, 
and  culminated  in,  the  otfering  up  of  the  only  begotten  Son 
of  God  as  a  sacrifice  to  his  Father,  in  what  respect  did  this 
latter  action  differ  from  the  culmination  of  the  pagan  sacrifices 
in  the  horrific  rites  of  Moloch  ? 

(54.)   "And  again  another  scripture  saith.  They  shall  look  '^^^^^'^^ 
on  him  whom  they  pierced  "  (John  xix.  37).      The  passage  is  tim^t^hey 
thus  introduced.      "  In   that  day  shall  the   Lord    defend  the  ^'^'"''^  *' 
inhabitants  of  Jerusalem  ;  and  he  that  is  feeble  among  them 
at  that  day  shall  be  as  David  ;   and  the  house  of  David    shall 
be   as   God,  as  the   angel  of  the  Lord    before  them.      And   it 
shall  come  to  pass    in  that  day  that   I  will  seek  to  destroy  all 
the    nations  that  come  against  Jerusalem.      And    I  will   pour 
upon  the  house  of  David  and  upon  the  inhabitants  of  Jeru- 
salem, the  spirit  of  grace  and  of  supplication  ;  and  they  shall 
look  upon  me  whom  they  have  pierced,  and  they  shall  mourn 
for   him   as    one  mourneth  for  his  only  son. — And  the  land 
shall  mourn,  every  family  apart ;   the  f:xmily  of  the  house  of 
David  apart,  and  their  wives  apart  ;  the  family  of  the  house  of 
Nathan  apart,  and  their  wives  apart ;  the  family  of  the  house 
of   Levi    apart,  and   their  wives   apart ;  the  family  of  Shiniei 
apart,  and  their  wives   apart  ;  all   the   families   that  remain, 
every  family  apart,  and  their  wives  apart"  (Zech.  xii.  8-14). 
Of  what  day  the   prophet   spoke  it  is  impossible  to  say,  but 
assuredly  it  was  not  that  of  Jesus.      There  was  then  no  such 
intervention  for  Jerusalem,  which  was  under  the  dominion  of 
the  Romans,  and    finally  succumbed    to  them  ;  nor  were   the 
Jews  brought  under  a   spirit  of  grace   and   supplication  ;   nor 
did  they  regard  Jesus,  or  mourn  for  him,  pierced  as  he  may 
have  been  in  common  with  other  accounted  culprits. 

{55.)   "  For  I  say  unto  you,  that  this  that  is  written  must  NumWd 
yet  be  accomplished   in   me.      And    he  was    reckoned   among  gressors. 
the  transgressors  "  (Luke  xxii.  37).      The  passage  referred  to 
is  this.     "  He  was  taken  from  prison  and  from  judgment  :  and 
who  shall  declare  his  generation  ?  for  he  was  cut  off  out  of 


mmmm 


280 


PROPHECY. 


PROPHECY. 


281 


The  rej-iir- 
rection. 


the  land  of  the  living  :  for  the  transgression  of  my  people  was 
he  stricken.  And  he  made  his  grave  with  the  wicked,  and 
with  the  rich  in  his  death. — He  was  numbered  with  the  trans- 
gressors, and  he  bare  the  sin  of  many,  and  made  intercession 
for  the  transgressors  "  (Isa.  liii.  8,  9,  1 2).  That  Jesus  died 
for  the  sins  of  others  is  commonly  accepted,  but  such  is  not 
the  manner  of  the  narrative.  He  was  brought  before  the 
constituted  authority  to  answer  for  himself,  and  being  found 
guilty,  suffered  condemnation.  The  most  that  can  be  said  is, 
that  the  sentence  was  an  unjust  one.  This  might  occur  be- 
fore any  human  tribunal,  but  the  innocence  of  the  accused  is 
in  itself  no  evidence  that  he  suffered  for  the  sins  of  others. 
That  Jesus  was  taken  from  prison,  as  described  by  Isaiah  of 
the  person  he  had  in  view,  does  not  happen  to  have  been  the 
case.  He  passed  from  arrest  to  judgment,  and  then  to  execu- 
tion, without  being  incarcerated.  Nor  were  the  particulars 
of  his  death  and  burial  such  as  described  by  the  prophet. 
The  crucifixion  between  thieves  would  bring  him  into  contact 
with  the  wicked  in  his  death  ;  but  here  it  is  an  association 
"  with  the  rich  in  his  death  "  that  is  in  question.  The  fact 
is,  that  the  ''wicked"  and  the  ''rich  "  spoken  of  by  Isaiah 
are  one  and  the  same,^  according  to  the  Hebrew  manner  of 
arresting  attention  by  reiteration  with  varied  phraseology. 
To  fulfil  the  declaration  of  the  prophet,  nothing  was  more  un- 
fortunate than  that  Jesus  should  have  been  laid  in  the  tomb 
of  a  godly  man. 

(dG.)  "For  as  Jonas  was  three  days  and  three  nights  in  the 
whale's  belly ;  so  shall  the  son  of  man  be  three  days  and  three 
nights  in  the  heart  of  the  earth  "  (Matt.  xii.  40).  "And  he 
began  to  teach  them,  that  the  son  of  man  must  suffer  many 
things,  and  be  rejected  of  the  elders,  and  of  the  chief  priests, 
and  scribes,  and  be  killed,  and  after  three  days  rise  again  " 
(Mark  viii.  31).  "He  rose  again  the  third  day  accordfng  to 
the  scriptures  "  (1  Cor.  xv.  4).  The  appeal  to  the  inciden't  of 
Jonah,  as  of  prophetic  import,  is  made  without  any  warrant 
from  the  narrative  itself  that  it  had  such  meaning ;  nor  can 
any  position  be  strengthened  by  reliance  on  a  tale  so  manifestly 
unreal.  The  application  is,  morever,  inaccurate.  Jesus  ex- 
pired about  three  o'clock^  on  the  afternoon  of  his  execution, 
1  Strauss'  New  Life  of  Jesus,  II.  396.  2  Kenan's  Life  of  Jesus,  292. 


which  was  a  Friday,  or  the  day  preceding  the  Jewish  Sabbath. 
The  tomb  was  visited  at  dawn  on  the  Sunday  morning,  when 
the  body  was  found  to  be  gone.  At  what  time  the  resurrection 
took  place  we  are  not  informed.  So  that  we  have  a  prediction 
respecting  a  precise  period  of  time,  without  means  alibrded  for 
marking  the  time.  But  of  one  thing  we  may  be  certain, 
namely,  that  the  event  predicted  falls  much  within  the  time 
given  for  its  occurrence.  Jesus  was  not  three  days  and  three 
nights  in  the  tomb,  as  Jonah  was  in  the  whale's  belly.  Sup- 
posing he  was  in  the  tomb  up  to  the  moment  when  it  was 
found  empty,  which  is  uncertain,  he  was  there  but  one  day  and 
a  fraction  and  two  nights,  or  just  half  the  predicted  period. 

Another  passage  sometimes  cited  for  the  statement  is 
this.  *■'  Come,  and  let  us  return  unto  the  Lord  :  for  he 
hath  torn,  and  he  will  heal  us:  he  hath  smitten,  and  he 
will  bind  us  up.  After  two  days  will  he  revive  us  :  in  the 
third  day  he  will  raise  us  up,  and  we  shall  live  in  his  sight. 
Then  shall  we  know,  if  we  follow  on  to  know  the  Lord  :  his 
going  forth  is  prepared  as  the  morning  :  and  he  shall  come 
unto  us  as  the  rain,  as  the  latter  and  former  rain  unto  the 
earth "  (Hos.  vi.  1-3).  This  speaks  of  the  renovation  and 
refreshment  of  Israel  as  the  consequence  of  their  repentance. 
They  have  been  chastened,  and  so  brought  to  turn  again  to  the 
Lord  ;  a  position  not  belonging  to  Jesus,  who  was  without  sin, 
and  always  one  with  God.  It  relates  to  a  plurality  of  persons, 
to  whom,  as  it  were,  new  life  was  to  be  imparted,  and  not  to  a 
single  individual  as  Jesus.  And  it  is  by  no  means  apparent 
that  the  vivification  is  otherwise  than  a  spiritual  one,  not 
meaning,  as  our  case  requires,  the  reanimation  of  the  physical 
body. 

"  Because  thou  wilt  not  leave  my  soul  in  hell,  neither  wilt 
thou  suffer  thine  Holy  One  to  see  corruption  "  (Acts  ii.  27). 
The  citation  is  made  by  Peter  from  the  IGtb  Psalm,  the  alle- 
gation being  that  "  David  speaketh  concerning"  Jesus,  and  so 
prophesies  of  his  "resurrection."  The  "proper  reading,"  says 
Dr  Davidson,  is  ''holy  ones  or  saints;  not  the  singular,  thy 
holy  one ;  showing  that  it  refers  to  the  pious  generally. 
'  Suffering  his  j^ious  ones  not  to  see  the  grave  is  to  deliver 
them  front  the  peril  of  death,'"  "Besides,"  observes  the  learned 
critic,  "  the  fourth  verse  is  inapplicable  to  Christ,  '  their  drink- 


|| 


'Miliar.  IlillliWI'tBfttfi'f™"™-''"'''''-'"'''^''- 


The 
ascension. 


The  call 
of  the 
Gentiles. 


282 


PROPHECY. 


offerings  of  blood  will  I  not  offer,  nor  take  up  their  names  into 
my  lips.'  How  can  the  Messiah  say  with  propriety  that  He 
will  not  join  in  the  iniquitous  services  of  idolaters,  nor  even 
name  the  names  of  their  deities  ?"^ 

"  And  as  concerning  that  he  raised  him  from  the  dead,  now 
no  more  to  return  to  corruption,  he  said  on  this  wise,  I  will 
give  you  the  sure  mercies  of  David"  (Acts  xiii.  34).  Paul  here 
speaks,  citing  Isa.  Iv.  3,  in  evidence  that  the  resurrection  of 
Jesus  had  been  proclaimed  by  the  prophet.  But  it  will  be 
found  that  Isaiah  is  referring  to  any  who  may  be  brought  to 
God,  and  not  to  some  particular  personage,  and  he  the  Messiah. 
He  calls  upon  "every  one  that  thirsteth"  to  ** hearken  dili- 
gently unto  him,"  *'  to  incline  their  ear,  and  come  unto  him," 
to  ''  hear  and  their  soul  should  live,"  and  then  adds  that  with 
such  he  '*  would  make  an  everlasting  covenant,  even  the  sure 
mercies  of  David."  Neither  Jesus,  nor  his  resurrection,  are  here 
in  question.  Paul  also  supports  himself  with  the  passage  from 
the  2d  Psalm,  "  Thou  art  my  son,  this  day  have  I  begotten 
thee,"  and  with  that  taken  by  Peter  from  the  16th  Psalm, 
''Thou  shalt  not  suffer  thine  Holy  One  to  see  corruption,"  neither 
of  which,  as  I  have  already  pointed  out,  are  applicable  to  Jesus. 

(57).  "  For  David  is  not  ascended  into  the  heavens  :  but  he 
saith  himself,  The  Lord  said  unto  my  Lord,  sit  thou  on  my 
right  hand,  until  I  make  thy  foes  thy  footstool"  (Acts  ii.  34, 
35).  This  is  a  citation  by  Peter  from  the  110th  Psalm.  Jesus 
(Luke  XX.  42,  43),  and  Paul  (Heb.  i.  13),  also  appeal  to  the 
passage,  but  with  a  different  view,  namely  as  evidencing  the 
divinity  of  the  Messiah.  I  have  shown  that  this  Psalm  is  not 
considered  ascribable  to  David,  and  that  its  subject  cannot  be 
Jesus. 

(58).  "  And  to  this  agree  the  words  of  the  prophets  ;  as  it 
is  written,  after  this  I  will  return,  and  will  build  again  the 
tabernacle  of  David,  which  is  fallen  down;  and  I  will  set 
it  up  :  that  the  residue  of  men  might  seek  after  the  Lord,  and 
all  the  Gentiles,  upon  whom  my  name  is  called,  saith  the  Lord, 
who  doeth  all  these  things"  (Acts  xv.  15-17).  The  passage 
referred  to  is  taken  from  Amos  ix.  11,  12,  and  stands  thus. 
"  In  that  day  will  I  raise  up  the  tabernacle  of  David  that  is 
fallen,  and  close  up  the  breaches  thereof;  and  I  will  raise  up 
1  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament,  II.  279. 


\ 


i 


PROPHECY. 


283 


his  ruins,  and  I  will  build  it  as  in  the  days  of  old  :  that  they 
may  possess  the  remnant  of  Edom,  and  of  all  the  heathen, 
which  are  called  by  my  name,  saith  the  Lord  that  doeth  this." 
The  speech  in  Acts  is  that  of  the  apostle  James,  made  at  a 
convocation  held  in  Jerusalem,  after  the  death  of  Jesus,  respect- 
inff  the  treatment  of  the  Gentile  converts.  The  citation  he 
makes  is  verbally  inaccurate,  and  especially  so  in  reference  to 
the  subject  then  in  hand.  Amos  was  speaking  of  the  restora- 
tion of  Israel  under  the  triumphant  Messiah,  when  God  would 
**  bring  again  the  captivity  of  his  people,"  and  would  "  plant 
them  upon  their  land"  (ver.  14,  15).  "The  tabernacle  of 
David "  was  at  this  time  to  be  restored,  and  the  Edomites, 
and  other  heathen  nations,  brought  under  subjection.  James 
misuses  the  passage,  and  keeping  out  of  view  the  name  of 
Edom,  which  is  the  clue  to  the  peoples  to  be  dealt  with,  as  also 
to  the  character  of  the  dealing  with  them,  turns  the  subjuga- 
tion of  the  Gentile  tribes  in  question,  nationally,  by  the  ruler 
on  the  throne  of  David,  into  the  adhesion  of  the  Gentiles, 
generally,  to  the  doctrines  of  the  suffering  and  rejected  Jesus. 

(59.)  "And  Jesus  went  out,  and  departed  from  the  temple  :  Tiie 
and  his  disciples  came  to  him  for  to  show  him  the  buildings  of  ^^^^^^ 
the  temple.  And  Jesus  said  unto  them,  see  ye  not  all  these 
things  ?  Verily  1  say  unto  you.  There  shall  not  be  left  here 
one  stone  upon  another,  that  shall  not  be  thrown  down.  And 
as  he  sat  upon  the  mount  of  Olives,  the  disciples  came  unto 
him  privately,  saying.  Tell  us  when  shall  these  things  be  ? 
And  what  shall  be  the  sign  of  thy  coming,  and  of  the  end  of 
the  world?"  Then  follow  the  signs  of  the  consummation 
predicted,  namely  wars,  famines,  pestilences,  &c.,  which  are 
"  the  beginning  of  sorrows ;  "  also  false  prophets,  the  setting 
up  of  "  the  abomination  of  desolation,  spoken  of  by  Daniel  the 
prophet  in  the  holy  place,"  and  the  appearance  of  false  Christs. 
But  "  immediately  after  the  tribulation  of  those  days  shall  the 
sun  be  darkened,  and  the  moon  shall  not  give  her  light,  and 
the  stars  shall  fall  from  heaven,  and  the  powers  of  the  heavens 
shall  be  shaken  :  then  shall  appear  the  sign  of  the  Son  of 
Man  in  heaven  :  and  then  shall  all  the  tribes  of  the  earth 
mourn,  and  they  shall  see  the  Son  of  Man  coming  in  the 
clouds  of  heaven  with  power  and  great  glory.  And  he  shal 
send  his  angels  with  a  great  sound  of  a  trumpet,  and  they  shal 


Nearness 
of  advent. 


284 


PROPHECY. 


gather  together  his  elect  from  the  four  winds,  from  one  end  of 
heaven  to  the  other.  Now  learn  a  parable  of  the  fig-tree ; 
when  his  branch  is  yet  tender,  and  putteth  forth  leaves,  ye 
know  that  summer  is  nigh  ;  so  likewise  ye,  when  ye  shall  see 
all  these  things,  know  that  it  is  near,  even  at  the  doors. 
Verily  I  say  unto  you.  This  generation  shall  not  pass,  till  all 
these  things  be  fulfilled.  Heaven  and  earth  shall  pass  away, 
but  my  words  shall  not  pass  away"  (Matt.  xxiv.  1-35). 

The  question  and  the  answer  together  make  it  apparent  that 
there  was  to  be  a  chain  of  events,  embracing  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem  and  the  return  of  Jesus  in  glory,  at  what  is  termed 
"  the  end  of  the  world,"  the  whole  of  which  was  to  be  brought 
to  pass  in  the  time  of  the  then  existing  generation.  So  far  as 
regards  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  it  was  a  prediction  written 
after  the  event,  and  that  part  of  the  announcement  stands 
true.  The  remainder,  being  the  portion  unaccomplished  when 
the  narrative  was  written,  has  not  been  realized  after  the  lapse 
of  now  eighteen  hundred  years. 

The  Christian's  hope   of  a  glorious  Messiah  stands  conse- 
quently as  much  defeated  as  the  similar  expectation  of  the 
Jews.      But   it   is   nevertheless  still  clung  to  in  spite  of  the 
abundant  evidence  that  the  advent  is  one  that  should  have 
taken  place  shortly  after  the  commencement  of  the  dispensa- 
tion.     *'  A  little  while,"  Jesus  said,  "  and  ye  shall  not  see  me; 
and  again,  a  little  while,  and  ye  shall  see  me,  because  I  go  to 
the  Father"   (John  xvi.  16).      There  are  two  periods,  one   in 
which  he  would  remain  in  sight,  and  one  when  he  should  have 
gone  to  the  Father  and  be  out  of  sight ;  and  both  are  spoken 
of  in  the  same  terms  as  amounting  to  but  "a  little  while." 
His  stay  on   earth,  when   this  was  spoken,  extended  to  but  a 
few  days.      He  could  not  have  meant  that  his  return  to  earth 
was  to  be  postponed  for  many  centuries.      "  For  yet  a  little 
while,  and  he  that  shall  come  will  come,  and  will  not  tarry  " 
(Heb.  X.  37).      ''Behold,  I  come  quickly;  and  my  reward  is 
with  me,  to  give  every  man  according  as  his  work  shall  be. — 
Surely  I  come  quickly.      Amen.      Even  so  come.  Lord  Jesus  " 
(Rev.  xxii.  12,  20) — promises  and  invocations  with  which  the 
book  concludes,  but  which  have  become  void  by  lapse  of  time. 
The   statement  was,    that   the    existing   generation   should 
witness  his  return  and  the  end    of  all  things,  and  the   same 


J 


1^ 


PROPHECY. 


285 


has  been   repeated  on   various   occasions.      Speaking  of   the 
trials   to  which  his    followers  were  to  be  subjected  before  his 
reappearance,  Jesus  said,  *'  When  they  persecute  you  in  this 
city,  flee  ye  into  another;  for  verily  I  say  unto  you.  Ye  shall  not 
have   gone  over  the  cities  of  Israel,  till  the  Son  of  man  be 
come  "  (Matt.  x.  23).      "  For  the  Son  of  man  shall  come  in 
the  glory  of  his  Father,  with  his  angels  ;  and  then   he  shall 
reward  every  man  according  to  his  works.      Verily,  I  say  unto 
you.  There   be  some  standing  here  which   shall  not  taste  of 
death  till  they  see  the  Son  of  man  coming  in  his   kingdom  " 
(Matt.  xvi.  27,  28).        "For  this   we   say   unto  you   by  the 
word  of  the  Lord,  that  we  which  are   alive   and    remain  unto 
the  coming  of  the    Lord,  shall  not  prevent  them  which   are 
asleep.      For  the  Lord  himself  shall  descend  from  heaven  with 
a  shout,  with  the  voice  of  the  archangel,  and  with  the  trump 
of  God':   and    the    dead   in   Christ   shall  rise  first;  then    we 
which  are  alive  and  remain  shall  be  caught  up  together  with 
them  in  the  clouds,  to  meet  the  Lord  in  the  air  :  and  so  shall 
we  ever  be  with  the  Lord.     Wherefore,  comfort  one  another 
with  these  words"  (1  Thes.  iv.  15-18).      -  Behold,  he  cometh 
with  clouds  ;  and  every  eye  shall  see  him,  and  they  also  which 
pierced   him  "  (Rev.  i.  7).      All  this   is   explicit  enough,  and 
evidently  applicable  to  those  actually  addressed.      Jesus  was  to 
be  revealed  to  them  in  glory  attended  by  the  angelic  hosts. 
Some  of  them  were  not  to  taste  of  death  till  he  so  returned. 
They  were  to  be  caught  up  to  him  when  he  came,  and  were  to 
comfort  each  other  with  this  hope.      Those  also  who  had  been 
fruilty  of  his  death  would  see  him  reappear  in  avenging  power. 

Such  being  the  hope  put  before  the  followers  of  Jesus,  it  was  AppHca- 
constantly  appealed  to  for  enforcement  of  doctrine.     -  Knowing  nean^ess^of 
the  time  that  now  it  is  high  time  to  awake  out  of  sleep  ;  tor  ^^^trinai 
now  is  our  salvation  nearer  than  when  we  believed.    The  night  teaciung. 
is  far  spent,  the  day  is  at  hand  :  let  us  therefore  cast  off  the 
works  of  darkness,  and  let  us  put  on  the  armour  of  light 
(Rom   xiii.  11,  12).       "  Art  thou  bound  unto  a  wife  ?       beek 
not  to  be  loosed.      Art  thou  loosed  from  a  wife  ?      Seek  not  a 
wife  —But  this  I  say,  brethren,  the  time  is  short:  it  remaineth, 
that  both  they  that  have  wives  be  as  though  they  had  none  : 
and  they  that  weep,  as  though  they  wept  not ;  and  they  that 
rejoice,  a^  though  they  rejoiced  not ;  and  they  that  buy,  as 


••;>-  \ 


286 


PROPHECY. 


tlioiigh  they  possessed  not ;  and  they  that  use  this  world,  as 
not  abusing  it  :  for  the  fashion  of  this  world  passeth  away '' 
(I  Cor.  vii.  27-31).  "  Rejoice  in  the  Lord  alway:  and  again 
I  say,  Rejoice.  Let  your  moderation  be  known  unto  all  men. 
The  Lord  is  at  hand.  Be  careful  for  nothing  "  (Phil.  iv.  4-6). 
*'  For  yourselves  know  perfectly  that  the  day  of  the  Lord  so 
Cometh  as  a  thief  in  the  night.  For  when  they  shall  say, 
Peace  and  safety;  then  sudden  destruction  cometli  upon  them, 
as  travail  upon  a  woman  with  child ;  and  they  shall  not  escape. 
But  ye,  brethren,  are  not  in  darkness,  that  that  day  should 
overtake  you  as  a  thief.  Ye  are  all  the  children  of  light,  and 
the  children  of  the  day:  we  are  not  of  the  night,  nor  of  dark- 
ness. Therefore  let  us  not  sleep,  as  do  others ;  but  let  us 
watch  and  be  sober  "  (1  Thess.  v.  2-6).  "  I  give  thee  charge 
in  the  sight  of  God, — that  thou  keep  this  commandment  with- 
out spot,  unrebukeable,  until  the  appearing  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ"  (1  Tim.  vi.  13,  14).  ''Let  us  hold  fast  the  profession 
of  our  faith  without  wavering  (for  he  is  faithful  that  promised); 
and  let  us  consider  one  another  to  provoke  unto  love  and  to 
good  works:  not  forsaking  the  assembling  of  ourselves  together 
as  the  manner  of  some  is  ;  but  exhorting  one  another  :  and  so 
much  the  more  as  ye  see  the  day  approaching. — Cast  not  away 
therefore  your  confidence,  which  hath  great  recompense  of 
reward.  For  ye  have  need  of  patience,  that  after  ye  have  done 
the  will  of  God,  ye  might  receive  the  promise.  For  yet  a  little 
while,  and  he  that  shall  come  will  come,  and  will  not  tarry  " 
(Heb.  X.  23-25,  35-37).  "Be  patient  therefore,  brethren, 
unto  the  coming  of  the  Lord.  Behold,  the  husbandman  waiteth 
for  the  precious  fruit  of  the  earth,  and  hath  long  patience  for 
it,  until  he  receive  tlie  early  and  latter  rain.  Be  ye  also 
patient  ;  stablish  your  hearts  :  for  the  coming  of  the  Lord 
draweth  nigh.  Grudge  not  one  against  another,  brethren,  lest 
ye  be  condemned:  behold,  the  judge  standeth  before  the  door" 
(James  v.  7-9).  "  The  end  of  all  things  is  at  hand  :  be  ye 
therefore  sober,  and  watch  unto  prayer  "  (1  Peter  iv.  7).  The 
disciples  of  Jesus  were  to  be  as  men  looking  for  daylight  at 
the  coming  of  dawn.  Sleep  for  them  was  impossible.  The 
season  of  darkness  had  nearly  expired ;  the  light  was  approach- 
ing; the  judge  of  all  was  at  the  very  threshold,  ready  to  enter. 
Social  ties,  worldly  interests,  griefs  and  joys,  were  as  nothing 


PROPHECY. 


287 


to  men  on  the  verge  of  realizing  their  glorious  expectations. 
This  consideration  was  to  influence  them  in  all  things,  in  acting 
in  the  world,  or  towards  each  other.  The  time,  short  in  itself, 
visibly  grew  shorter  and  shorter.  The  end,  bringing  joy  to 
themselves,  and  grief  to  the  adversaries,  was  at  hand ;  and  they 
were  to  comfort  and  strengthen  one  another  in  the  certainty, 
and  the  nearness,  of  this  happy  issue. 

The  Apocalypse  unfolds  the  circumstances  attendant  on  this  Testimony 
grand  consummation,  and  it  speaks  with  the  same  assurance  of  J^yp"^,^*" 
its  early  advent.      It  opens  thus.      ''  The  Revelation  of  Jesus 
Christ,  which  God  gave  unto  him,  to  show  unto  his  servants 
things  which  must  shortly  come  to  pass"  (i.  1).     And  it  con- 
cludes in  the  like  vein.     *'  These  sayings  are  faithful  and  true  : 
and  the  Lord  God  of  the  holy  prophets  sent  his  angel  to  show 
unto  his   servants   the   things  which  must  shortly  be  done" 
(xxii.  6).      Again,    at   the    outset,   the    declaration    is    made, 
"  Blessed  is  he  that  readeth,  and  they  tliat  hear  the  words  of 
this  prophecy,  and  keep  those  things  which  are  written  therein: 
for  the  time  is  at  hand"  (i.  3).     And  so  also  at  the  close. 
"  Behold,  I  come  quickly  :  blessed  is  he  that  keepeth  the  say- 
ings of  the  prophecy  of  this  book. — Seal  not  the  sayings  of  the 
prophecy  of  this  book  :  for  the  time  is  at  hand"  (xxii.  7,  10). 
These  sayings  affected  the  generation  then  addressed,  in  whose 
days  all  the  predictions  they  conveyed  were  to  be  brought  to 

pass. 

But  though  conscious  that  the  time  for  his  return  was  near  precise 

at  hand,  Jesus  professed  himself  unable  to  say  when  it  was  fe^eaied!"" 

that  the  event  so  important  to  all  interested   in  it  was  actually 

to  take  place.     It  is  inexplicable  how  ignorance  on  any  subject 

could  attach  to  a  divine  personage  such  as  Jesus  ;  but  so  the 

matter  is  indubitably  put  before  us.      "  Of  that  day,"  he  said, 

*'  and  that  hour  knoweth  no  man,  no,  not  the  angels  which  are 

in  heaven,  neither  the  Son,  but  the  Father."   (Mark  xiii.  32). 

The  fact  was  there,  but  when  to  be  brought  about  it  was  not 

for  him  to  know.      And  when  asked,  after  his  resurrection, 

*'  Lord,  wilt  thou  at  this  time  restore  again  the  kingdom   to 

Israel,"  he  could  still  make  no  revelation.      "  It  is  not  for  you," 

he  said,  ''  to  know  the  times  or  the  seasons,  which  the  Father 

hath  put  in  his  own  power "   (Acts  i.  6,  7).      Jeremiah  could 

be  entrusted  with  information  of  the  precise  duration  of  the 


—:rwgg.  T^m^:^jf^i'JTmi.i" 


288 


PROPHECY. 


PROPHECY. 


289 


The 

suffering 
and  the 
triumph- 
ant 
Messiah. 


captivity  in  Babylon,  and  Daniel  with  the  limits  of  the  period 
that  was  further  to  elapse  to  the  close  of  the  Jewish  dispensa- 
tion. The  return  of  Jesus  in  glory  could  be  but  as  the  last 
mentioned  period  expired  ;  and  yet,  as  the  term  approached,  he, 
the  Son  of  God,  was  not  to  know  when  this  consummation  of 
his  work  was  to  be  effected.  What  was  distant  could  be  pro- 
phetically revealed  ;  what  was  near  at  hand  was  not  to  be 
disclosed ;  a  distinction  convenient  for  the  prophet,  however 
little  so  for  the  expectants. 

(60.)  These  are  the  prophecies  relied  upon  as  presenting  Jesus 
to  us  in  the  attributes  of  the  Messiah.  The  question  between 
Jews  and  Christians  is,  has  there  been  any  exhibition  of  the 
promised  deliverer  ?  The  Christians  answer  it  by  asserting  a 
division  in  his  characteristics  and  career  of  so  marked  a  nature 
as  really  to  constitute  two  different  beings  ;  the  one  abject, 
suffering,  and  rejected ;  the  other  accepted,  powerful,  and 
glorious.  But  when  the  prophecies  appealed  to  for  support  of 
the  idea  of  a  suffering  Messiah  are  examined,  they  are  found, 
one  and  all,  so  mixed  up  in  time  and  circumstances  with  what 
belongs  to  the  glorious  one,  that  the  severance  claimed  cannot 
be  conceded,  or  the  twofold  advent  seen  to  exist.  Zacharias, 
when  he  proclaims  the  birth  of  Jesus,  describes  the  triumphant 
role  which  he  never  fulfilled.  The  appeals  are  frequent  to 
Moses  as  well  as  to  the  prophets,  but  Moses  has  not  a  word 
respecting  a  suffering  Messiah.  The  successor  to  himself  was 
to  be  a  true  leader  of  the  people,  such  as  he  was,  and  not  a 
rejected  one.  The  promises  to  Abraham  had  respect  to  an 
earthly  inheritance  not  realized  by  Jesus,  and  those  to  David 
involved  an  occupant  of  his  regal  throne  to  which  Jesus  never 
attained.  Daniel's  anointed  one,  who  was  to  be  cut  off,  if  the 
same  as  his  Messiah,  was  to  be  a  princely  personage.  The 
Elias  that  had  to  come,  was  to  appear  when  the  Messiah  dis- 
played himself  in  power.  A  double  advent  of  Elias,  to  cor- 
respond with  a  double  advent  of  the  Messiah,  is  not  spoken 
of.  The  voice  crying  in  the  wilderness,  does  so  when  Israel 
are  comforted  and  the  glory  of  the  Lord  revealed.  The  "ac- 
ceptable year  of  the  Lord,"  comes  not  without  "  the  day  of 
vengeance  of  our  God."  The  personage  entering  Jerusalem  on 
an  ass,  does  so  as  an  actual  king.  The  man  of  sorrows  cannot 
be  identified  among  other  sorrowing  ones  till  he  *'  divides  a 


portion  with  the  great,"  and  "  the  spoil  with  the  strong  •»  nor 
can  the  stone  rejected  of  the  builders  be  discerned,  among  other 
stones,  as  what  was  to  be  the  head  of  the  corner,  till  it  becomes 
distinguishable  in  actuality,  as  the  foundation  of  the  edifice     The 
pierced  one,  is  so  pierced  when  Jerusalem  is  made  to  triumph 
over  all  her  adversaries.     If  the  prophecies  of  Jesus  are  to  be 
dependent  on  those  relating  to  the  Messiah  in  glory,  then  Jesus 
a^  we  have  him,  has  not  been  prefigured  in  prophecy.     And  it 
IS  vain  to  claim  for  him  the  office  of  the  Messiah,  without  show- 
ing that  he  has  executed  the  Messiah's  appointed  work      The 
non-renovation  of  the  Jewish  nation  is  a  standing  eddence 
that  their  Messiah  has  not  yet  appeared. 


Pundit.— I  have  carefully  considered  the  paper  you  have  in^    *• 
been  good  enough  to  lend  me.     Your  examination  of  the  diffe-  ^y  mTr^^ 
rent  subjects  of  prophecy  makes  it  unnecessary  for  me  to  offer  Xhecy. 
observations  of  my  own.      I  come,  in  view  of  all  you  have  tfut 
Tn  ?  T."'.^"  «»e  conclusion  that  the  channels  of  instruction 
held  forth  by  the  Christians  are  not  such  as  God  makes  use  of 
lie  does  not  risk  his  communications  to  the  uncertain  vehicle 
of  a  written  record,  depending  upon  man  for  its  safe  custody 
transmission,  and   interpretation.      He  reveals  himself  to  us 
through  the  unerring  laws  of  nature,  physical  and  moral,  and 
does  not  seek  to  attract  our  regards,  or  instruct  our  minds,  by 
disturbing  those  laws.     We  are  to  trace  cause  from  effect,  and 
It  wrong  effects  are  produced,  we  steer  clear  of  the  evil  by 
avoiding  the  cause.      Wfe  judge  of  the  future  by  the  past,  see- 
ing what  results  from  the  influence  of  .events,  s'ingle  and  com- 
bined, and  regulating  our  course  accordingly.     But  all   this 
wholesome  method  of  instruction  is  superseded  if  we  are  to  be 
cast  upon  the  operations  of  marvel-mongers,  and  the  indications 
ot  those  who  profess  to  reveal  to  us  what  has  yet  to  come  to 
pass.     I  do  not  believe  that  God  is  thus  untrue  to  his  own 
system.     I  have  seen  the  hoUowness,  and  the  folly,  of  a  religion 
built  up  among  my  own  people  upon  the  marvellous,  and  am 
httle  tempted  to  embrace  another  form  which  I  perceive  is 
supported  upon  the  like  foundations. 


HISTOEY  OF  JESUS. 


VII. 

RENEWED  CONVERSATION. 

Pundit. — Will  you  be  good  enough  now  to  put  before  me 
the  particulars  of  the  life  of  Jesus,  upon  the  reality  of  which 
the  Christian  dispensation  so  entirely  depends  ? 

Student. — I  will  do  so  with  pleasure. 
Narrative.  The  Jews  were  expecting  the  advent  of  a  great  personage, 
who  was  to  deliver  the  nation  from  their  oppressors,  and  rule 
over  them  in  triumph.  He  was  to  be  a  lineal  descendant  of 
their  early  and  renowned  king  David,  and  was  to  be  known  as 
the  Messiah,  or  the  Christ,  terms  which  signify  the  anointed 
one.  Jesus  is  considered  to  have  been  the  person  thus  in- 
dicated. 

He  was  to  be  preceded  by  a  messenger,  who  was  to  pre- 
pare the  world  for  his  coming,  and  who  is  designated  in  the 
old  prophecy  as  "  Elijah  the  prophet."  There  were  a  priest  and 
his  wife,  named  Zach arias  and  Elizabeth.  These  were  aged 
people,  and  the  wife  was  barren.  Suddenly  an  angel  appeared 
to  Zacharias  while  officiating  in  the  temple,  and  said  to  him, 
"  Thy  prayer  is  heard ;  and  thy  wife  Elizabeth  shall  bear  thee 
a  son,  and  thou  shalt  call  his  name  John. — Many  shall  rejoice 
at  his  birth. — He  shall  be  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  even 
from  his  mother's  womb.  And  many  of  the  children  of  Israel 
shall  he  turn  to  the  Lord  their  God.  And  he  shall  go  before 
him  in  the  spirit  and  power  of  Elias,  to  turn  the  hearts  of  the 
fathers  to  the  children,  and  the  disobedient  to  the  wisdom  of 
the  just ;  to  make  ready  a  people  prepared  for  the  Lord."  The 
child  was  duly  born,  and  known  as  John  the  Baptist,  and  he 
is  considered  to  have  been  the  promised  precursor  of  the 
Messiah. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


291 


Three  or  four  months  before  the  birth  of  John,  the  same 
angel,  who  was  called  Gabriel,  appeared  to  a  cousin  of  Eliza- 
beth's, named  Mary.     She  was  "  a  virgin  espoused  to  a  man 
whose  name  was  Joseph,  of  the  house  of  David."     The  angel 
announced  to  her  that  she  was  to  have  a  son,  who  was  to  be 
named  Jesus,  of  whom  he  said,  ''He  shall  be  great,  and  shall 
be  called  the  son  of  the  Highest ;  and  the  Lord  God  shall  give 
unto  him  the  throne  of  his  father  David  ;  and  he  shall  reiga 
over  the  house  of  Jacob  for  ever  ;  and  of  his  kingdom  there 
shall  be  no  end."      Mary  wondered  how  she  was  to  have  a 
child,  ''  seeing,"  as  she  observed,  "  I  know  not  a  man."      On 
this  the  angel  said  to  her,  ''  The  Holy  Ghost  shall  come  upon 
thee,  and   the  power  of  the  highest  shall  overshadow  thee  ; 
therefore  also  that  holy  thing  which  shall  be  born  of  thee  shall 
be  called  the  son  of  God."     Mary,  accordingly,  ''was  found  with 
child  by  the  Holy  Ghost."     Her  husband  Joseph,  discovering 
her  condition  "  before  they  came  together,"  was   "  minded  to 
put  her  away  privily,"  not  wishing  to  make  a  "public  example"     . 
of  her.     An  angel  then  appeared  to  him  in  a  dream,  and  said, 
"Joseph,  thou  son  of  David,  fear  not  to  take  unto  thee  Mary 
thy  wife  ;  for  that  which  is  conceived  in  her  is  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.      And  she  shall  bring  forth  a  son,  and  thou  shalt  call 
his  name  Jesus  ;  for  he  shall  save  his  people  from  their  sins." 
Joseph,  accordingly,  "being  raised  from  sleep,  did  as  the  angel 
of  the  Lord  had  bidden  him,  and  took  unto  him  his  wife  ;  and 
knew  her  not  till  she  had  brought  forth  her  first-born  son;  and 
he  called  his  name  Jesus." 

P.— -Allow  me  to  interrupt  you  and  to  ask  a  few  questions.  Birth  of 
Zacharias  and  his  wife  are  represented  to  have  been  advanced  '^*'^''- 
in  years,  and  the  latter  to  be  barren.  The  angel  informs 
Zacharias  that  his  prayer  had  been  heard,  and  that  his  wife 
was  to  bear  him  a  son.  Is  it  likely,  under  the  circumstances, 
that  Zacharias  could  still  have  been  hoping  and  praying  that 
his  aged  partner  should  become  prolific? 

^' — '^'Jie  probability  is,  undoubtedly,  much  against  his 
having  indulged  in  such  a  hope.  In  fact,  when  the  assurance 
was  given  him  that  his  prayer  was  to  be  fiilfdled,  he  appeared 
to  think  this  impossible,  and  was  struck  dumb  for  a  time  for 
his  incredulity.  The  statements,  therefore,  here  involve  some 
inconsistency,  faith  in  prayer  meeting  with  its  reward,    and 


292 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


judgment  overtaking  a  doubter,  and  both  visitations  affecting 
the  same  individual  at  the  same  moment.  Similar  interven- 
tions by  God  had,  however,  repeatedly  occurred.  The  wives 
of  Abraham  and  of  Isaac,  and  one  of  Jacob's  wives,  were  all 
afflicted  with  barrenness,  and  God  nevertheless  gave  them 
children,  the  first  named  when  in  old  age.  The  wife  of 
Manoah,  from  whom  came  Samson,  and  Hannah,  the  mother 
of  Samuel,  present  similar  instances.  Zacharias  may  have 
been  encouraged  by  these  interpositions  to  hope  for  a  like 
favour  in  his  own  case. 

P. — I  should  rather  conclude  that  the  incidents  had  been 
introduced  just  to  magnify  the  importance  of  the  persons  re- 
presented to  have  been  so  marvellously  brought  into  the  world. 
It  is  more  probable  that  the  writers  should  have  worked  from 
the  same  idea,  derived  from  one  another,  than  that  God  should 
have  been  in  the  habit  of  repeating  himself  with  the  same 
manifestations. 
Coming  of  The  precursor  of  Jesus  was  to  be  Elijah  the  prophet,  a  well- 
^^^*  known  personage  in  the  preceding  dispensation.       How  can 

this  be  said  to  be  fulfilled  by  the  appearance  of  a  new  and  un- 
known person,  namely  John  the  Baptist? 

S. — You  will  observe  it  was  said  by  the  angel  who  an- 
nounced the  birth  of  John  that  he  was  to  act  "  in  the  spirit 
and  the  power  of  Elias."  Jesus,  referring  to  John,  said,  "  If 
ye  will  receive  it,  this  is  Elias,  which  was  for  to  come"  (Matt, 
xi.  14.)  Afterwards,  when  the  real  Elias  had  appeared  together 
with  Moses  at  the  time  that  Jesus  was  transfigured  on  the 
mount,  the  disciples  put  the  question  to  him,  "  Why  then  say 
the  scribes  that  Elias  must  first  come  ? "  On  which  he  an- 
swered, "  Elias  truly  shall  come  and  restore  all  things.  But 
I  say  unto  you  that  Elias  is  come  already,  and  they  knew 
him  not,  but  have  done  unto  him  whatsoever  they  listed. 
Then  the  disciples,"  it  is  added,  "  understood  that  he  spake 
unto  them  of  John  the  Baptist"  (Matt.  xvii.  10-13). 

P. — This  appears  to  me  most  unsatisfactory.  If  the  real 
Elijah  had  just  appeared  on  the  mount,  could  Jesus  have 
pointed  to  an  ideal  Elijah  as  accomplishing  the  prediction? 
And  would  the  disciples  have  accepted  such  a  solution  ?  No- 
thing could  fulfil  the  position  but  the  appearance  of  Elijah 
the  prophet  himself.     To  say  of  another,  acting  in  his  spirit 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


293 


and  power,  that  he  was  the  one  spoken  of,  is  no  fulfilment, 
but  a  mere  accommodation.  The  sense  of  this  weakness  ap- 
pears felt  where  it  is  said,  "  If  ye  will  receive  it,  this  is  Elias." 
Anything  whatever  may  be  so  accepted,  "  if  ye  will  receive  it." 
He  might  have  said  equally,  "  This  is  Abraham,  or  Moses,  if 
ye  will  receive  it."  Afterwards  comes  the  bolder  assertion 
that  ''Elias  is  come  already;"  but  this  is  quite  neutralised  by 
the  admission  made  just  before  that  Elias  had  yet  to  come, 
and  restore  all  things.  All  I  can  see  is  an  impotent  attempt 
to  make  it  appear  that  the  predicted  mission  of  Elias  was  ful- 
filled in  John,  and  I  cannot  but  think  that  the  scene  of  the 
transfiguration,  wherein  the  true  Elias  is  said  to  have  shown 
himself,  has  been  introduced  just  to  help  out  this  idea,  though 
certainly  in  a  clumsy  manner. 

May  I  ask  did  many  rejoice  at  the  birth  of  John  the  Bap-  Mission  of 
tist  ?  and  did  he  effect  all  that  the  angel  declared  he  should  ''**^- 
do,  namely,  turn  many  of  the  Israelites  to  God,  bring  the  dis- 
obedient to  the  wisdom  of  the  just,  and  make  ready  a  people 
prepared  for  the  Lord  ? 

S. — There  is  no  record  of  people  rejoicing  at  the  birth  of 
John,  nor  is  it  conceivable  how,  with  nothing  to  mark  him  out 
for  notice,  there  should  be  any  such  public  demonstration  at 
his  coming  into  the  world.  His  ministry  is  said  to  have  taken 
effect  upon  the  whole  country  round  about,  it  being  declared 
that  "Jerusalem,  and  all  Judea,  and  all  the  region  round 
about  Jordan,"  went  out  to  him  confessing  their  sins  and 
receiving  baptism  at  his  hands  (Matt.  iii.  5,  6).  This,  how- 
ever, on  the  face  of  the  statement,  is  clearly  an  exaggeration, 
and  the  universality  of  John's  influence  is  directly  contradicted 
elsewhere,  where  it  is  said  that  "  the  publicans  justified  God, 
being  baptised  with  the  baptism  of  John.  But  the  Pharisees 
and  lawyers  rejected  the  counsel  of  God  against  themselves, 
being  not  baptised  of  him"  (Luke  vii.  29,  30).  The  same 
unqualified  language  is  used  of  the  ofiices  of  Jesus,  of 
whom  it  is  said,  "  the  same  baptiseth,  and  all  men  come  to 
him"  (John  iii.  26);  whereas,  we  are  also  told,  "he  came  unto 
his  own,  and  his  own  received  him  not"  (Johni.  11).  John's 
preaching  consisted  in  his  calling  out,  "  Repent  ye :  for  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  is  at  hand"  (Matt.  iii.  2),  and  his  baptism 
is  hence  described  as  "  the  baptism  of  repentance  for  the  re- 


294 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


295 


mission  of  sins'*  (Mark  i.  4).  He,  however,  clearly  declared 
that  his  mission  was  of  inferior  import  to  that  of  Jesus,  and 
unattended  by  spiritual  influences.  "  I  indeed  baptise  you," 
he  said,  "  with  water,  unto  repentance  :  but  he  that  cometh 
after  me  is  mightier  than  I,  whose  shoes  I  am  not  worthy  to 
bear  :  he  shall  baptise  you  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  with  fire" 
(Matt.  iii.  11).  Jesus,  on  the  other  hand,  greatly  exalted 
John,  saying  of  him,  "Verily  I  say  unto  you,  among  them 
that  are  born  of  women  there  hath  not  risen  a  greater  than 
John  the  Baptist"  (Matt.  xi.  11),  putting  him  thus  on  a  level 
with  Abraham,  Moses,  Samuel,  David,  Elijah,  &c. 

P. — All  that  is  said  of  John  seems  to  me  marked  with  gross 
exaggeration.  He  could  not  have  baptized  the  whole  region 
round  about,  if  they  all  came  and  were  baptized  by  Jesus. 
The  statements  neutralize  each  other,  and  the  passages  you 
cite  as  opposed  to  them  contradict  them  effectually.  John 
seems  to  have  held  Jesus  up  to  admiration,  and  in  return 
Jesus  John. 

John  called  on  men  to  repent,  as  the  kingdom  of  heaven 
was  at  hand.     Was  such  kingdom  established  ? 

,Sf. — There  has  been  nothing  of  the  kind  as  yet.  Jesus  in 
fact  said,  *'My  kingdom  is  not  of  this  world"  (John  xviii.  86). 

P. — Then  John's  appears  to  have  been  a  vain  message.  His 
baptism  is  said  to  have  been  for  the  remission  of  sins.  Does 
this  mean  that  those  who  underwent  it  had  their  sins  washed 
away  ? 

S. — That  cannot  have  been  so,  as  it  is  said,  *' Without  shed- 
ding of  blood  is  no  remission"  (Heb.  ix.  22).  The  only  blood 
that  could  wash  away  sin  is  that  of  Jesus,  and  that  had  not 
been  shed. 

P. — Then  of  what  use  was  the  office  of  John  ?  If  the  re- 
pentance and  the  baptism  he  called  for  could  neither  take  away 
sin,  nor  command  spiritual  influences,  of  what  value  was  it  ? 

S. — John's  baptism  is  shown  to  have  had  no  efficacy.  The 
true  baptism  was  that  appointed  by  Jesus  after  his  resurrection, 
which  was  to  be  "  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son, 
and  of  the  Holy  Ghost"  (Matt,  xxviii.  19).  Paul,  in  the 
course  of  liis  ministry,  met  with  persons  who  had  undergone 
John's  baptism  only,  and  who  had  "  not  so  much  as  heard 
whether  there  was  any  Holy  Ghost  •"  and  explaining  to  them 


that  John  had  merely  to  lead  up  to  Jesus,  he  baptized  them 
afresh  '*  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus"  (Acts  xix.  1-5). 
Moreover,  the  statement  made  that  there  is  but  "  one  Lord, 
one  faith,  one  baptism"  (Eph.  iv.  5),  disallows  all  the  prior 
baptisms. 

P. — As  John  is  said  to  have  been  filled  with  the  Holy 
Ghost  from  his  mother's  womb,  it  is  strange  that  his  dis- 
ciples should  not  even  have  heard  that  there  was  a  Holy 
Ghost. 

S. — It  is  so  certainly. 

p. — Seeing  that  Jesus  offered  himself  to  his  own,  and  was 
rejected  by  them,  and  finally  crucified,  how  can  John  be  said 
to  have  made  ready  a  people  prepared  for  the  Lord  ? 

S. — I  cannot  tell  you. 

p. — What  were  the  positive  fruits  of  bis  mission,  or  those 

of  Jesus  after  him. 

S. — The  number  of  the  disciples  after  the  death  of  Jesus  was 
"about  an  hundred  and  twenty"  (Acts  i.  15),  and  there  were 
followers  of  John  such  as  those  who  were  rebaptized  by  Paul, 
as  above  mentioned. 

P. — And  is  this  all  that  can  be  spoken  of  after  the  whole  of 
Judea  and  all  the  region  round  about  haxl  confessed  their  sins, 
and  been  baptized  by  John  and  by  Jesus  in  succession  to  him? 
The  mission  of  John,  instead  of  marking  him  out  as  one  of  the 
greatest  men  who  had  ever  lived,  seems  to  me  to  have  been 
stamped  with  absolute  failure. 

If  the  true  baptism  had  to  be  established  after  the  death  of 
Jesus,  and  a  preliminary  baptism,  whatever  purpose  it  was 
meant  to  serve,  was  committed  to  John,  what  could  be  the 
occasion  for  the  baptism  dispensed  by  Jesus  to  so  many  during 
his  lifetime ;  and  dispensed,  it  would  seem,  in  vain,  so  far  as 
gathering  them  in  as  his  followers  was  in  view  ? 
S, — I  am  unable  to  say. 

p. The  next  event  is  the  birth  of  Jesus.      The  subject  is  Birth  of 

introduced  in  a  conversation  between  an  angel  and  Mary.  He  ^^"^ 
tells  her  that  she  is  to  have  a  son,  and  at  this  she  expresses 
extreme  wonderment,  seeing  that  she  "  knew  not  a  man."  But 
as  she  was  at  the  time  affianced,  or  a^  good  as  married,  to 
Joseph,  this  feeling  of  surprise  is  certainly  out  of  place.  The 
incident  has  the  appearance  of  having  been  brought  in  just  to 


296 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


allow  of  the  promised  conception  by  the  Holy  Ghost  being  in- 
troduced with  effect. 

With  the  miraculous  birth  of  a  being  of  human  form,  but 
divine  origin,  I  am  already  familiar  from  Hindu  fictions.  The 
parentage  of  Jesus  is  derived  from  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  third 
person  in  the  Christian  Trinity.  The  angel  speaks  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  to  Mary  as  if  already  familiarly  known  to  her,  as  he 
did  also  to  Zacharias  in  respect  of  his  promised  son.  On  the 
other  hand,  you  have  mentioned  disciples  of  John  who  had 
never  heard  that  there  was  a  Holy  Ghost.  When  was  the  re- 
velation of  this  person  in  the  Trinity  first  made  ? 

S. — His  existence  is  nowhere  spoken  of  previously  to  the 
occasions  now  in  question. 

P. — And  yet  Mary  takes  it  as  a  matter  of  course  that  she 
is  to  have  a  child  by  him  !  The  fact  we  really  have  to  deal 
with  is  that  of  a  young  person,  accounted  a  virgin,  being  found 
by  her  husband  already  with  child.  As  he  was  about  to  put 
her  away  for  profligacy,  it  would  seem  she  must  have  kept 
back  from  him  the  revelation  made  to  her  by  the  angel.  Is 
it  conceivable  that  she  should  run  such  risks  ?  When  her 
husband- discovered  for  himself  the  condition  she  was  in,  he 
must  of  course  have  questioned  her  closely  on  the  subject,  and 
what  could  have  been  her  answer  ?  It  must  be  presumed  that 
then  at  least  she  must  have  told  him  of  the  apparition  to  her 
of  the  angel  Gabriel,  and  of  the  consequent  conception  by  the 
Holy  Ghost  ;  and  it  must  be  concluded  that,  if  she  made  such 
a  statement,  he  could  not  have  accepted  it,  as  till  he  got  the 
assurance  of  his  own  dream  his  intention  was  to  divorce  her. 
And  if  he  could  not  credit  Mary's  subtantial  declaration  of  what 
she  had  witnessed  with  her  own  senses,  would  a  dream  have 
sufficed  to  satisfy  him  of  the  chastity  of  his  wife,  and  that  the 
parent  of  her  coming  offspring  was  that  mysterious  personage 
the  Holy  Ghost,  hitherto  unheard  of  by  any  one  ? 

S. — According  to  Matthew's  narrative,  Joseph,  it  is  clear, 
knew  nothing  of  the  revelation  made  to  Mary.  It  is  stated, 
after  speaking  of  his  discovering  the  state  of  Mary  and  his 
design  to  put  her  away,  that  "  while  he  thought  on  these  things, 
behold,  the  angel  of  the  Lord  appeared  unto  him  in  a  dream." 
Nor  was  a  word  said  to  him  in  this  dream  of  the  apparition  to 
Mary.     The  silence  of  Mary  is  certainly  not  to  be  reconciled 


\\ 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


297 


with  the  fact  that  she  had  received  such  a  revelation  ;  neither  is 
it  consistent  with  the  divine  method  to  suppose  that  such  an 
annunciation  should  have  been  made  twice,  and  in  indepen- 
dent form.  It  is  commonly  held  by  critics  that  there  was  but 
one  such  annunciation,  and  that  the  two  narratives  are  in 
conflict  as  to  the  circumstances  under  which  it  was  made. 
Luke  gives  it  as  made  to  Mary,  and  Matthew  as  made  to  Joseph, 
neither  speaking  of  the  event  told  by  the  other. 

P. — And  is  it  upon  accounts  so  inconsistent  and  at  variance 
that  the  fact  of  the  divine  generation  of  Jesus  depends  ? 

S. — Certainly  there  is  nothing  else  to  cite  in  proof  of  the 
divinity  of  his  parentage,  unless  it  be  involved  in  the  circum- 
stances of  his  history  and  acts  when  on  earth. 

P. — Jesus,  it  appears,  was  to  occupy  the  throne  of  David  The  throne 
and  reign  over  the   house  of  Jacob,  and   yet  never  had   that 
position ! 

S. — Assuredly  he  had  not.  The  idea  is  that  it  is  a  pre- 
diction remaining,  in  some  way  or  other,  to  be  fulfilled.  Al- 
though Jesus  gave  out  that  his  kingdom  was  not  of  this  world, 
he  held  out  to  his  disciples  that  "in  the  regeneration"  he 
would  "  sit  on  the  throne  of  his  glory,"  when  they  also  were 
to  sit  "upon  twelve  thrones,  judging  the  twelve  tribes  of 
Israel"  (Matt.  xix.  28). 

P. — The  only  certainty  then  at  present  is  that  the  predic- 
tion has  not  been  accomplished. 

Jesus  was  to  be  the  son  of  David,  and  that  fact  also  is  not 

made  out.  * 

S. — It  is  not.  As  on  the  father's  side  he  came  from  the 
Holy  Ghost,  his  connection  with  any  human  stock  could  only 
be  through  his  mother ;  and  here  the  alliance  was  with  the 
tribe  of  Levi,  not  of  Judah.  It  is  through  Joseph  that  the 
descent  is  sought  to  be  maintained,  but  as  he  was  not  his 
father,  Joseph  affords  no  real  link  with  David.  Nor  can  the 
genealogies  which  would  derive  Joseph  from  David  be  de- 
pended on. 

p Will  vou   be   good  enough  to  put  these   genealogies  The  genea- 

before  me  ? 

S. These  lists  will  enable  you  to  compare  the  statements 

of  the  evangelists  with  one  another,  and  with  what  appears  iu 
the  Old  Testament. 


^mim^tm 


298 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


OLD  TESTAMENT.  MATTHEW. 

David  David 


LUKE. 


David 


Solomon      Nathan 

Solomon 

Nathan 

Rehoboam 

Roboam 

Mattatha 

Abijah 

Abia 

Menan 

Asa 

Asa 

Melea 

Jehoshaphat 

Josaphat 

Eliakim 

Jehoram 

Joram 

Jonan 

Ahaziah 

Joseph 

Joash 

Juda 

Amaziah 

Simeon 

Uzziah 

Ozias 

Levi 

Jotham 

Joatham 

Mat  that 

Ahaz 

Achaz 

Jorim 

Hezekiah 

Hlzekias 

Eliezer 

Manasseh 

Manasses 

Jose 

Ammon 

Amon 

Er 

Josiah 

Josias 

Llmodam 

Eliakim  or 

Cosam 

Jehoiakim 

Jaconiah 

Jachonia 

Addi 

Melchi 

Neri 

Salathiel 

Salathiel 

Salathiel 

Pedaiah 

Zorobabel 

Zorobabel 

Zorobabel 

Abiud 

Rhesa 

Eliakim 

Joanna 

Azor 

Juda 

Sadoc 

Joseph 

Achim 

Semei 

Eliud 

Mattathias 

Eleazar 

Maath 

Nagge 

Esli 

Naum 

Amos 

Mattathias 

Joseph 

. 


t  I 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


299 


Janna 

Melchi 

Levi 

Matthan 

Matthat 

Jacob 

Heli 

Joseph 

Joseph 

Jesus 

Jesus 

You  will  observe  that  David  had  two  sons,  Solomon  and 
Nathan.      These  were  his  children  by  Bathsheba,  the  wife  he 
wrenched  from  Uriah.     Matthew  traces  Joseph  from  Solomon, 
and  Luke  derives  him  from  Nathan.      This  is  a  fatal  diver- 
gence.     The  names   and  numbers  of  the   descendants  neces- 
sarily differ,  the  lines  being  distinct  from  the  outset.      Mat- 
thew has  twenty-five  generations  between  David  and  Joseph, 
and  Luke  has  forty.      Matthew  has  followed  the  genealogy  in 
the  Old  Testament,  as  far  as  it  goes,  but  with  strange  liber- 
ties in   orthography;  and   he  has   been   guilty  of  omissions, 
namely,  of  three  persons  between  Jehoram  and  Uzziah,  one 
between  Josiah  and  Jeconiah,  and  one  between  Salathiel  and 
Zorobabel.      In  deriving  Jesus  from  Jaconiah  he  brings  against 
him  the  ban  of  Jeremiah  (xxii.  30),  who  declared  that  no  man 
of  his  seed  should  prosper  or  sit  upon  the  throne  of  David  ; 
whereby,   as   Matthew  gives  the  descent,  we   have   prophecy 
ranged  against  prophecy.      Luke  has  had  no  prior  genealogy 
that  we  know  of  to  go  by,  and  would  seem  to  have  made  up 
one  from  his  own  imagination.      The  third  name  on  his  list  is 
Mattatha.      On  this  the  changes  are  wrung,— Mattatha,  Mat- 
that,  Mattathias,  Maath,  Mattathias,  Matthat,  as  if  to  help  out 
the  list.      In  the  same  way  names  of  the  patriarchs,  Joseph, 
Juda,    Simeon,    Levi;    and    Juda,    Joseph,    Semei    (changed 
seemingly  from  Simeon),  are  clubbed  together.     Notwithstand- 
ing that  the  line  of  Luke  is  a  totally  dissimilar  one  from  that 
given    by   Matthew,   it  is  singular   that  he   should  fall  into 
Matthew's  line  in  certain  parts.      For  example,  he  has  with 
him  Salathiel  followed  by  Zorobabel,  omitting,  as  Matthew  has 
done,  Pedaiah,  who,  according  to  the  Old  Testament,  came  be- 
tween   them,   and   he    presents    Matthat  as  Joseph's    grand- 
father, which  corresponds  with  Matthan  as  given  by  Matthew. 
P. — How  is  it  attempted  to  reconcile  these  genealogies  ? 


'1 


300 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


S. — This  has  been  a  sore  puzzle  to  all  concerned  in  uphold- 
ing the  integrity  of  the  gospels.  The  common  explanation  is, 
that  the  genealogy  by  Luke  is  really  that  of  Mary,  though  she 
is  unmentioned  in  it.  The  supposition  is,  for  there  is  no 
evidence  to  the  fact,  that  Heli,  represented  in  Luke  to  be  the 
father  of  Joseph,  was  really  the  father  of  Mary,  and  that  as 
the  Jews  rank  a  son-in-law  as  a  son,  Joseph  could  be 
reckoned  the  son  of  Heli ;  whereby  we  have  the  strange 
anomaly  of  two  very  diverse  genealogies,  a  legal  and  a  natural 
one,  ascribed  to  the  same  person.  So  far  as  respects  the  general 
difference  between  the  two  genealogies.  The  special  discrepan- 
cies and  objections  I  have  above  noticed  have  not  been  met, 
as  far  as  I  know  ;  and  there  are  other  such  difficulties.  Mat- 
thew makes  a  fanciful  division  of  his  list  into  three  sections  of 
fourteen  generations  each.  The  first  embraces  from  Abraham 
to  David,  both  names  included,  but  in  attempting  to  bring  the 
succeeding  sections  into  uniformity  in  point  of  number,  sundry 
errors  occur.  He  has  "  the  carrying  away  into  Babylon  "  as 
the  term  for  the  second  section.  This  is  explained  to  have 
been  in  the  time  of  Josias  and  his  sons,  "  Jechonias  and  his 
brethren  "  (i.  1 1).  The  number  of  generations,  again,  turns 
out  to  be  fourteen  ;  namely  from  Solomon  to  Jechonia,  both 
names  inclusive,  but  this  result  is  only  obtained  by  the  omis- 
sion of  four  of  the  names  appearing  in  the  Old  Testament  list. 
The  third  section,  from  Salathiel  to  Jesus,  both  names  in- 
clusive, which  should  be  of  fourteen  generations,  consists  of 
but  thirteen,  a  blemish  in  his  calculations  which  the  writer 
might  certainly  have  avoided  had  he  thought  of  Pedaiah, 
standing  in  the  ancient  list  between  Salathiel  and  Zorobabel, 
whom  he  has  omitted.  Moreover  from  Rahab,  Salmon's  wife, 
to  David,  is  four  hundred  years,  during  which,  according  to 
Luke,  but  four  generations  occur. 

P.  I  must  say  these  very  serious  discrepancies  and  errors 
stamp  the  writers,  viewing  them  as  mere  human  historians, 
as  not  trustworthy.  I  should  be  sorry  if  my  own  pedigree 
depended  on  such  uncertain  data.  The  object  was  to  show 
Jesus  to  be  born  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  at  the  same  time  a 
lineal  descendant  of  David's,  and  this  is  met  by  putting  forward 
certain  genealogies  of  Joseph,  with  whom  he  was  in  no  sense 
connected-;  genealogies,  moreover,  which  in  their  discordance 


K  ■ 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


301 


contradict  one  another,  and  leave  upon  the  mind  the  impression 
that  they  have  been  made  up  for  a  purpose. 

Is   the   derivation  of  Jesus  from   procreation  by  the  Holy  "^^f^^^^ 
Ghost  dwelt  upon  in  other  parts  of  these  writings  ? 

S.  The  fact  is  never  again  adverted  to.  Matthew  and  Luke 
speak  of  it  no  more,  and  it  is  nowhere  referred  to  by  Mark  or  John. 
Consequently  it  is  never  imputed  to  Jesus  that  he  himself 
asserted  that  particular  manner  of  derivation,  though  he  did  at 
times  claim  a  divine  origin.  Peter,  James,  and  Jude,  were 
apostles,  but  they  never  mention  the  circumstance  in  their 
epistles  ;  neither  does  Paul.  Nor  does  it  appear  in  the  epistles 
and  the  Apocalypse  which  are  ascribed  to  the  apostle  John. 

P.  That  certainly  is  against  the  reality  of  the  event.  In 
what  capacity  was  Jesus  currently  accepted  as  to  his  patepnity? 
S.  He  commonly  passed  as  of  human  extraction,  "  being  (as 
was  supposed)  the  son  of  Joseph"  (Luke  iii.  23).  When  his 
"  gracious  "  utterances  astonished  the  people,  they  said,  "  Is 
not  this  Joseph's  son?"  (Luke  iv.  22).  "  Whence,"  they  asked, 
"  hath  this  man  this  wisdom,  and  these  mighty  works  ?  Is 
not  this  the  carpenter's  son  ?  is  not  his  mother  called  Mary  ? 
and  his  brethren,  James,  and  Joses,  and  Simon,  and  Judas  ? 
and  his  sisters,  are  they  not  all  with  us  1  Whence  then  hath 
this  man  all  these  things  ?"  (Matt.  xiii.  54-56  ;  see  also  John 

i.  45;  vi.  42). 

P.  His  mother,  Mary,  at  all  events,  could  have  told  his  real 
parentage.      How  was  it  that  she  disclosed  it  not  ? 

S.  That  I  cannot  tell  you.  She  had  personally  received  the 
annunciation  of  the  angel,  and  could  witness  in  herself  that 
Jesus  had  had  no  human  father.  An  angel  had  appeared  to 
shepherds  on  the  night  of  the  birth  of  Jesus,  and  had  told 
them  that  this  was  the  expected  Christ,  or  Messiah.  After 
which  "a  multitude  of  the  heavenly  host"  had  suddenly 
appeared,  ushering  in  his  advent  with  praises  to  God ;  and  all 
this  they  had  immediately  gone  and  declared  to  Joseph  and 
Mary,  and  also  published  it  abroad.  The  wise  men,  who  came 
with  offerings  to  the  infant,  had  been  inspired  to  recognise  him 
as  the  Christ.  Herod,  moreover,  being  satisfied  of  his  preten- 
sions to  be  the  future  king  of  the  Jews,  had  exterminated  the 
young  children  bom  at  that  time,  so  as  to  put  an  end  to  him 
also.     That,  nevertheless,  Jesus  should  be  currently  accounted 


302 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


the  son  of  Joseph,  and  that  his  mother  should  not  have  said  a 
word  to  undeceive  the  people,  and  to  advance  her  son's  true 
pretensions,  is  no  doubt  marvellous  in  the  extreme.      But  it  is 
still  more  surprising  that  she  herself  retained  no  impression  of 
his  real  character,  but  looked   upon  him,  apparently,  as  an 
ordinary  being.     Forty  days  after  the  birth  of  Jesus,  he  was 
taken  to  the  temple  for  the  fulfilment  of  certain  rites  there. 
On  his  being  brought  in,  Simeon,  an  aged  man,  to  whom  it 
had  been  revealed  by  the  Holy  Ghost  that  he  should  not  "  see 
death,  before  he  had  seen  the  Lord's  Christ,"  at  once  recognised 
him  as  the  hope  of  the  world,  "  a  light  to  lighten  the  Gentiles, 
and  the  glory  of  the  people  Israel."      Anna,  a  prophetess,  did 
the  like.      And  notwithstanding  the  angelic  assurances  which 
they  had  each   received  that   this  infant  had  sprung  from  a 
divine  stock,  "  Joseph  and  his  mother,"  it  is  said,  ''  marvelled 
at  those  things  which  were  spoken  of  him"  (Luke  ii.  21-33). 
On  another  occasion,  when  they  went  to  the  temple  at  the 
time  that   Jesus  was  twelve  years  of  age,  and   had  left  the 
building,  he  remained  behind  and  was  found  by  them  engaged 
in  discussion  with  the  doctors,  or  men  of  learning,  with  a 
degree  of  understanding  that  "  astonished  "  all  who  heard  him. 
Not  recognizing  his  divine  resources,  Joseph  and  Mary  were 
equally  astonished  with  the  rest.      ''  And  his  mother,"  we  are 
told,  "  said  unto  him,  Son,  why  hast  thou  thus  dealt  with  us  ? 
Behold,  thy  father  and  I  have  sought  thee  sorrowing.      And 
he  said  unto  them,  How  is  it  that  ye  sought  me  ?  wist  ye  not 
that  I  must  be  about  my  Father's  business  ?     And  they  under- 
stood not  the  saying  which  he   spake   unto   them,"   we    are 
informed,  even  after  such  an  advertence  as  this  to  his  divine 
origin  (Luke  ii.  41-50).     On  a  third  occasion,  when  Jesus  was 
occupied  in  his  ministry  and  engaged  with  a  great  multitude, 
"  So  that  they  could  not  so  much  as  eat  bread,"  his  mother 
and    his    brothers    concluded,    for   some    cause,    that   he   was 
*' beside  himself,"  and  "went  out  to  lay  hold  of  him,"  utterly 
unconscious  of  his  divinity  and  appointed  work  (Mark  iii.  20, 

21,  31). 

P. — There  appears  to  me  but  one  way  of  accounting  for 
such  violence  of  all  probability,  namely,  that  these  stories  are 
destitute  of  any  foundation  in  reality.  On  one  occasion,  I 
observe,  Mary  distinctly  alludes  to  Joseph  as  the  father.      She 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


303 


i 


says   to  Jesus,   ''Behold  thy  father  and  I  have  sought  thee 
• )> 


sorrowing. 


But  assuming  that  Jesus  was,  as  declared,  begotten  irrespec-  Blemishes 
tively  of  Joseph,  would  not  his  position,  as  one  without  a  human 
father  to  point   to,  be  that  of  illegitimacy  ?     And,  if  so,  how 
would  that  affect  his  standing  in  the  eye  of  the  Jewish  law  ? 

8. — "  A  bastard,"  it  is  said,  "  shall  not  enter  into  the  con- 
gregation of  the  Lord,  even  to  his  tenth  generation"  (Deut. 
xxiii.  2).  Jesus  was  in  the  habit  of  going  into  the  synagogue 
on  the  Sabbath  days,  and  reading  out  publicly  from  the  scrip- 
tures (Luke  iv.  16),  and  he  openly  taught  there  and  in  the 
temple  (John  xviii.  20).  If  known  to  have  been  born  out  of 
wedlock,  this  would  not  have  been  permitted.  How  he  got 
over  the  difficulty  himself,  seeing  that  he  said  he  came  not  "to 
destroy,  but  to  fulfil "  the  law,  not  "  one  jot  or  one  tittle  of 
which "  was  to  be  passed  over  (Matt.  v.  1 7,  1 8),  I  am  unable 
to  explain. 

P. — Jesus  is  derived  also  from  a  vitiated  stock,  according  to 
the  pedigree  of  Joseph,  if  he  can  properly  be  associated  there- 
with, as  one  of  his  progenetrixes  was  the  adulteress  Bathsheba. 

S. — That  is  not  the  only  blemish.  You  will  find  in  this 
pedigree  other  objectionable  females  ;  namely,  Tamar,  Rahab, 
and  Ruth.  Tamar  was  the  daughter-in-law  of  Judah,  and 
from  their  incestuous  intercourse  came  Phares,  from  whom 
Joseph  is  derived.  Rahab  was  a  harlot  of  Jericho,  that  is  of 
Gentile  stock,  with  whom  the  Jews  could  not  legally  inter- 
marry. And  Ruth  was  a  Moabitess,  coming  from  Moab,  the 
fruit  of  Lot's  incest  with  his  own  daughter,  and  a  Gentile  line 
held  in  peculiar  abomination  (Deut.  xxiii.  3). 

p. — It  seems  extraordinary  to  associate  one  who  was  to  see 
the  law  fulfilled  in  every  tittle  with  so  many  transgressors  of 

the  law. 

In  what  sort  of  estimation  did  Jesus  hold  his^  mother,  upon  Estimate 
whom  the  Holy  Ghost  had  conferred  such  great  honour  as  to  ^^^^^J^^^^ 
procreate  a  son  from  her  ? 

S, The  angel  who  announced  to  her  this  intended  honour 

addressed  her  in  appropriate  terms.  "  Hail,"  he  said,  "  thou 
that  art  highly  favoured,  the  Lord  is  with  thee  :  blessed  art 
thou  among  women. — Fear  not,  Mary  :  for  thou  hast  found 
favour  of  God."      Jesus,  however,  appears  to  have  held  her  in 


304 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


Narrative 
resumed. 


little  account,  treating  her  with  austerity  or  indifference. 
On  an  occasion,  when  he  was  told,  "  Behold,  thy  mother  and 
thy  brethren  stand  without,  desiring  to  speak  with  thee,''  he 
replied,  "  Who  is  my  mother  ?  and  who  are  my  brethren  ? 
And  he  stretched  forth  his  hand  towards  his  disciples,  and 
said,  Behold  my  mother  and  my  brethren!"  (Matt.  xii.  47-49). 
On  another  occasion,  a  woman  exclaimed,  "  Blessed  is  the 
womb  that  bare  thee,  and  the  paps  which  thou  hast  sucked." 
This  might  certainly  have  drawn  out  a  declaration  of  his  super- 
human origin,  but  all  he  said  was,  "Yea,  rather,  blessed  are 
they  that  hear  the  word  of  God,  and  keep  it"  (Luke  xi.  27,  28). 
At  the  marriage  feast,  where  he  converted  water  into  wine, 
his  mother,  evidently  prepared  in  some  unaccountable  way  for 
a  miraculous  display  of  his  power,  though  hitherto  he  had 
wrought  no  miracle,  said  to  him,  "They  have  no  wine;"  on 
which  he  turned  upon  her  roughly,  and  said,  "  Woman,  what 
have  I  to  do  with  thee  ?  mine  hour  is  not  yet  come  "  (John 
ii.  3,  4).  And  when  he  was  on  the  cross,  observing  her  and  his 
favourite  disciple  present,  he  committed  them  one  to  the  other, 
but  in  these  cold  and  haughty  terms,  "Woman,  behold  thy  son !" 
and  to  the  disciple,  "Behold  thy  mother"  (John  xix.  26,  27). 

P. — I  certainly  do  not  recognise  here  the  meek  and  loving 
disposition  I  hear  attributed  to  Jesus.  His  conduct  seems  to 
me  to  have  been  rude,  and  influenced  by  no  small  measure  of 
pride  and  self-sufficiency,  directed  even  towards  his  only  earthly 
parent.  Perhaps  there  is  something  in  the  Jewish  law,  every 
point  in  which  he  had  to  sustain,  which,  in  inculcating  relations 
with  God,  discountenanced  sympathies  with  human  relations. 

S. — On  the  contrary;  one  of  the  ten  commandments  written 
with  the  finger  of  God  on  the  tables  of  stone  committed  to 
Moses,  was,  "Honour  thy  father  and  thy  mother:  that  thy  days 
may  be  long  upon  the  land  which  the  Lord  thy  God  giveth 
thee,*'  which  is  specially  re-enforced  in  the  Christian  dispen- 
sation as  "  the  first  commandment  with  promise  "  (Eph.  vi.  2). 

P. — These  representations,  as  professing  to  be  history,  cer- 
tainly teem  with  most  extraordinary  features.  Will  you  be 
good  enough  to  proceed  with  the  narrative  ? 

S. — The  birth  place  of  Jesus  was  at  Bethlehem,  a  circum- 
stance that  connected  him  with  the  predicted  Messiah  who  was 
to  be  of  the  stock  of  David.     Matthew  introduces  him  there, 


THE  HISTOBY  OF  JESUS. 


305 


and  recounting  how  Herod,  when  his  birth  as  the  king  of  the 
Jews  was  made  known  to  him  by  the  wise  men,  slaughtered  all 
the  infants  in  that  neighbourhood,  hoping  to  destroy  Jesus 
among  them,  goes  on  to  describe  the  flight  of  Joseph  with  his 
family  to  Egypt,  and  their  return  thence.  He  shows  that  they 
were  going  back  to  Judea,  meaning  thereby  to  Bethlehem,  but 
were  turned  aside  to  Galilee,  and  so  settled  at  Nazareth.  Luke 
places  the  family  originally  in  Nazareth,  and  brings  them  to 
Bethlehem  for  a  special  reason,  namely,  there  to  undergo  taxa- 
tion. Every  one,  he  states,  had  to  resort  to  his  own  city  to  be 
taxed,  and  Joseph,  being  of  the  line  of  David,  had  to  appear 
for  the  purpose  at  the  city  of  David,  which  was  Bethlehem  ; 
and  while  they  were  thus  there  Jesus  was  born.  Luke's  further 
statement  is  that  some  forty  days  after  the  birth  of  Jesus,  he 
was  taken  to  the  temple,  on  the  occasion  when  Simeon  and 
Anna  publicly  recognised  him  as  the  Messiah,  after  which  the 
family  returned  to  Nazareth. 

With  the  exception  of  Jesus  visiting  the  temple  at  the  age 
of  twelve,  when  he  entered  into  a  discussion  with  the  doctors 
and  astonished  all  by  the  powers  of  his  understanding,  as  re- 
counted by  Luke,  we  hear  no  more  of  him  till  he  entered  upon 
his  public  ministry  at  the  age  of  thirty.  Here  his  history  is 
taken  up  by  the  other  two  evangelists,  Mark  and  John,  also. 
His  precursor  John  was  then  baptizing  at  the  river  Jordan, 
and  thither  Jesus  repaired  and  was  baptized  by  him.  Then 
"the  heaven  was  opened,  and  the  Holy  Ghost  descended  in  a 
bodily  shape  like  a  dove  upon  him,  and  a  voice  came  from 
heaven,  which  said.  Thou  art  my  beloved  Son ;  in  thee  I  am 
well  pleased."  Immediately  after  this  Jesus  was  driven  by  the 
Spirit  into  the  wilderness,  and  "  was  there  in  the  wilderness 
forty  days,  tempted  of  Satan."  The  evangelist  John,  however, 
has  it  that  "the  third  day"  after  the  descent  upon  him  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  Jesus  was  at  the  marriage  in  Cana  of  Galilee  where 
he  changed  the  water  into  wine. 

P. — If  I  understand  you  rightly,  there  is  a  discrepance  as  Birth  at; 
to  whether  Bethlehem  or  Nazareth  was  the  fixed  home  of  the  hem.^ 
parents  of  Jesus  before  his  birth.     I  would  ask  you  to  open 
this  out  to  me  more  distinctly. 

S, — Matthew  recounts  Joseph's  dream  without  saying  where 
he  was  when  it  occurred.     He  goes  on  to  describe  the  birth  of 


306 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


Jesus  at  Bethlehem,  and  it  is  presumable  that  this  was  the 

home    of   the    family.      Then  there   is   the  flight  to   Egypt. 

"Be    thou    there,"   the   angel   told   Joseph,    "until   I   bring 

thee  word;"  and  when  the  word  comes,  it  is  in  this  form, 

"Arise,  and  take  the  young  child  and  his  mother,  and   go 

into   the   land   of   Israel:    for   they   are  dead   which    sought 

the  young   child's  life."     The  injunction  evidently  was  that 

they  were  to  return  to  the  spot  from  whence  they  had  fled, 

that  is  to  Bethlehem,  and  this  could  only  have  been  because 

there  was  their  home.     Accordingly,  they  "  came  into  the  land 

of  Israel,"  but  finding  a  son  of  Herod's  ruling  there,  Joseph 

"  turned  aside  into  the  parts  of  Galilee."     This  is  the  first  we 

hear  of  the  family  being  in  that  region,  and  the  account  plainly 

leaves  it  to  be  understood  that  it  was  owing  to  this  incident  of 

their  being  so  "turned  aside"  thither,  that  they  established 

themselves  in  Galilee.    "And  he  came,"  it  is  stated,  "and  dwelt 

in  a  city  called  Nazareth :  that  it  might  be  fulfilled  which  was 

spoken  by  the  prophets,  He  shall  be  called  a  Nazarene." 

Luke  describes  the  annunciation  to  Mary  to  have  occurred 
at  Nazareth,  so  that  the  family  are  found  there  from  the  be- 
ginning. Then  he  makes  them  proceed  to  Bethlehem,  spe- 
cially, on  account  of  the  taxation,  which  was  to  embrace  Mary 
as  well  as  Joseph.  He  shows  that  there  they  had  no  home, 
but  had  recourse  to  an  inn,  and  as  "  there  was  no  room  for  them 
in  the  inn,"  the  child  had  to  be  laid  up  "  in  a  manger,"  so 
that  the  birth  must  have  taken  place  in  a  stable.  Matthew, 
however,  consistently  with  his  representation  that  Bethlehem 
was  at  the  time  the  settled  abode  of  the  family,  has  it  that  the 
child  was  in  a  house,  and  it  may  be  judged  the  one  they  usually 
inhabited.  The  wise  men  from  the  East  find  him  there. 
*'  And  when  they  were  come  into  the  house,  they  saw  the 
young  child  with  Mary  his  mother,  and  fell  down,  and  wor- 
shipped him."  Being  in  this  way  at  Bethlehem,  they  wait 
there,  pursuant  to  Luke,  till  they  had  to  visit  the  temple  to 
make  the  prescribed  sacrifice  for  the  offspring  when  "  the  days" 
of  Mary's  "  purification  according  to  the  law  of  Moses  were 
accomplished."  This  was  after  the  lapse  of  forty  days  from 
the  birth  (Lev.  xii.  2-4).  "  And  when,"  it  is  stated,  "  they 
had  performed  all  things  according  to  the  law  of  the  Lord,  they 
returned  into  Galilee,  to  their  own  city  Nazareth." 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


307 


P. — In  what  ligbt  was  Jesus  looked  upon  when  he  embarked 
upon  his  mission  as  the  Messiah,  as  from  Bethlehem  or  from 
Nazareth  ? 

S.  Always  as  of  Nazareth.      He   is   so  designated   by  the 
unclean  spirit  in  the  synagogue  (Mark  i.  24  ;  Luke  iv.  34)  ; 
when  passing  a  blind  man  whom  he  restores  to  sight  (Mark 
X.  47;  Luke  xviii.  37) ;  and  by  the  multitude  who  greet  him 
when  he  made  a  triumphal  entry  into  Jerusalem    (Matt.  xxi. 
11).      He  is  arrested  under  that  designation  (John  xviii.  5,  7), 
and  transferred  by  Pilate  to  Herod  as  soon  as  he  heard  he  was 
of  Galilee,  and  thus  under   Herod's  jurisdiction  (Luke   xxiii. 
6,  7).      At  the  place  of  judgment,  where  Peter  denies  him,  he 
is  referred  to  as  of  Galilee  and  Nazareth  (Matt.  xxvi.  69,  71). 
He  is  described  as  of  Nazareth  in  the  label  placed  on  his  cross 
(John  xix.  19) ;  and  is  so  adverted  to  by  disciples  who  fell  in 
with  him  at  Emmaus  after  his   resurrection   (Luke  xxiv.  1 9) ; 
and  invariably  so  spoken  of  by  his  followers  and  opponents  in 
after  times  (Acts  ii.  22 ;   iii.  6  ;  iv.  10  ;  vi.  14 ;   x.  38).    We 
have  also  his  own  testimony  to  the  same  effect,  where,  referring 
to  this  locality,  he  says,  "  a  prophet  is  not  without  honour,  but 
in  his  own  country,  and  among  his  own  kin,  and  in  his  own 
house  "  (Mark  vi.  1-4  ;  Matt.  xiii.  54,  57),  expressions  incon- 
sistent with  the  idea  that  he,  or  his,  could  be  traced  to  Beth- 
lehem.     Finally,  an  angelic  messenger  speaks  of  him  at  his 
tomb  as  of  Nazareth  (Mark  xvi,  6)  ;  and  he  so  proclaims  him- 
self from  heaven  when  addressing  Paul  in  the  vision  which 
effected  his  conversion   (Acts  xxii.  8).      Nowhere  is  he  asso- 
ciated with  Bethlehem  but  in  the  accounts  of  his  birth  given 
by  Matthew  and  Luke,  save  that  Luke  apparently  has  his  own 
previous  statement  in  mind  as  to  the  birth  at  Bethlehem,  in  a 
passage  where  he  speaks  of  Nazareth  as  the  place  where  Jesus 
"had   been    brought   up"   (Luke   iv.    16).      But   there  were 
occasions  when,  if  the  birth  did  take  place  at  Bethlehem,  the 
fact  should  have  been  brought  out.     Philip  tells  Nathanael,  a 
devout  man,   "  We  have  found  him,  of  whom  Moses  in  the  law 
and  the  prophets  did  write,  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  the  son,"  he 
represents,    "of  Joseph."     Nathanael,  evidently  instructed  in 
the  prophecies  concerning  the  Messiah,  replies,  "  Can  there  any 
good  thing  come  out  of  Nazareth  ?"     To  which  Philip  rejoins, 
"  Come  and  see"  (John  i.  45,  46).     Now  if  that  "  good,"  or 


308 


HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


The 
taxation. 


as  elsewhere  called  "  holy  thing,"  had  been  the  offspring  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  here  was  a  time  for  declaring  the  fact;  and  cer- 
tainly Nathanael  ought  to  have  been  assured  that  his  birth  had 
been  at  Bethlehem,  as  required  by  the  exigency  of  the  pro- 
phecy. But  he  is  simply  told,  ''Come  and  see;"  that  is, 
"Come  and  see  that  a  good  thing  can  be  derived  from  Nazareth." 
The  same  question  was  raised  on  another  occasion.  Some  said, 
"  This  is  the  Christ."  Then  it  was  asked,  ''  Shall  Christ  come 
out  of  Gahlee?  Hath  not  the  scripture  said,  that  Christ 
Cometh  of  the  seed  of  David,  and  out  of  the  town  of  Bethlehem, 
where  David  was  ?  So  there  was  a  division  among  the  people 
because  of  him  "  (John  vii.  41-43)  ;  and  yet  not  a  soul  comes 
forward  to  satisfy  the  inquirers  with  a  declaration  of  the  birth 
at  Bethlehem,  and  its  wondrous  and  important  adjuncts, — -the 
heavenly  hosts  appearing  to  the  shepherds,  the  star  guiding  the 
wise  men,  and  the  slaughter  of  the  infants. 

P. — There  are  then  these  two  accounts  of  the  birth  at 
Bethlehem,  consisting  of  details  so  discordant  as  to  make  them 
absolutely  irreconcileable ;  and  not  only  a  want  of  support  to 
such  a  fact  in  the  remainder  of  these  histories,  but  everything 
to  contradict  it.  The  taxation,  which  is  said  by  Luke  to  have 
brought  the  family  to  Bethlehem,  may  possibly  possess  the 
features  which  should  belong  to  it  as  an  historical  event. 

S. — The  measure  is  described  by  Josephus  as  resorted  to 
solely  for  the  estimation  of  property.  The  object  would  have 
been  entirely  defeated  by  the  inhabitants  transferring  them- 
selves from  their  usual  places  of  abode  to  other  quarters.  The 
pretext,  therefore,  for  the  movement  of  the  family  from  Naza- 
reth to  Bethlehem,  given  by  Luke,  could  have  no  foundation 
in  fact.  Nor  could  the  Roman  Emperor  exercise  authority  of 
this  kind  in  the  territories  of  an  allied  prince  such  as  Herod, 
who,  though  he  paid  tribute  to  Rome,  collected  his  own  taxes. 
Consequently  there  oould  have  been  no  such  taxation  under 
the  orders  of  Caesar  Augustus  in  Judea,  as  declared  by  Luke, 
in  the  time  the  province  continued  under  the  rule  of  Herod.^ 
The  census  of  Cyrenius,  or  Quirinus,  according  to  Josephus 
(Ant.  xvii.  xiii.  5,  xviii.  i.  I.,  ii.  I),  did  not  take  place  until 
after  the  deposition  of  Axchelaus,  the  son  and  successor  of 
Herod  (Matt.  ii.  22),  when  Judea  became  a  province  of  Rome, 

^  Giles'  Christian  Records,  121  ;  English  Life  of  Jesus,  I.  60. 


HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


309 


which  was  ten  years  after  the  death  of  Herod.^  "  It  cannot 
have  been,"  observes  Strauss,  "  the  census  of  Quirinus,  for  that 
did  not  take  place  until  ten  years  later  ;  it  cannot  have  been 
one  so  much  earlier,  for  nothing  is  known  of  anything  of  the 
sort,  and  it  would  be  in  contradiction  to  the  circumstances ; 
not  a  Roman  census,  for  that  could  not  have  summoned  a 
Galilean  to  Bethlehem;  quite  as  little  a  Jewish  registering, 
for  on  such  an  occasion,  as  on  that  of  a  Roman  one,  Mary 
might  have  stayed  at  home."^  It  is  clear,  therefore,  that 
Luke's  account  of  the  family  coming  to  Bethlehem  to  submit 
themselves  to  this  census,  or  taxation,  cannot  be  accepted  as 
consistent  with  the  true  historical  facts. 

P. — Are  there  any  historical  characters  among  those  who  Witnesses 
received  or  gave  testimony  to  the  advent  of  the  Messiah  at  the  toricai. 
time  of  his  miraculous  birth?  The  shepherds,  to  whom  the 
angels  appeared,  are  not  named,  and  would  probably  be  un- 
known even  had  they  been  so.  Nor  are  the  wise  men,  who 
were  led  by  the  star,  specified,  but  being  spoken  of  as  renowned 
for  wisdom,  they  should  have  been  known  characters.  And 
then  there  are  Simeon  and  Anna  who  recognised  him  in  the 
temple. 

S. — There  is  not  a  trace  by  which  any  of  the  parties  can 
be  identified  so  as  to  be  ascertained  to  have  been  living  per- 
sonages. There  is  a  Simeon,  called  Niger,  spoken  of  in  the 
Acts  (xiii.  I  ;  xv.  14),  but  this  was  forty-four  years  after  the 
birth  of  Jesus,  and  he  cannot  have  been  the  one  in  the  temple, 
who  was  an  aged  man  whose  life  had  been  specially  prolonged 
that  he  might  so  see  the  Messiah  ;  and  Anna,  the  prophetess, 
is  never  heard  of  again.  She  also  was  then  "  of  great  age." 
She  is  said  to  have  been  the  daughter  of  Phanuel,  but  who  he 
was  no  one  knows. 

P. — In  respect  of  Herod  killing  the  young  children,  and  ^J^^^^^ 
the  flight  to  Egypt  by  means  of  which  Jesus  escaped,  what 
were  the  measures  taken  by  Herod  to  secure  Jesus?  and  how 
did   John  the  Baptist,  who  was  an  infant  at  the  time,  avoid 

the  peril  ? 

S. — The   wise   men   came   to   Jerusalem   and    went   about 
asking,  "  Where  is  he  that  is  born  King  of  the  Jews  ?  for  we 

1  Giles'  Christian  Records,  120,  121  ;  Renan's  Life  of  Jesus,  46,  note. 

2  New  Life  of  Jesus,  II.  28. 


810 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JEStJS. 


have  seen  his  star  in  the  east,  and  are  come  to  worship  him." 
On  this  the  actual  king,  Herod,  as  well  as  "  all  Jerusalem," 
became  troubled,  and  the  chief  priests  and  scribes  were 
assembled,  and  asked  in  what  place,  according  to  prophecy, 
the  Christ  should  be  born.  On  this  Bethlehem  was  indicated  ; 
upon  which  Herod  sent  for  the  wise  men  privately,  and  told 
them  to  go  to  Bethlehem  and  find  out  the  child,  and  then  to 
come  and  tell  him  of  him,  that  he  also  might  go  and  worship 
him.  The  wise  men,  however,  being  warned  of  God  in  a 
dream,  did  not  fall  into  the  snare,  but  went  away  without 
going  near  Herod  again.  Joseph,  being  in  like  manner  warned 
in  a  dream,  fled  with  his  family  to  Egypt.  Upon  this  the 
king,  finding  that  he  had  been  "  mocked  of  the  Avise  men,  was 
exceeding  wroth,  and  sent  forth  and  slew  all  the  children  that 
were  in  Bethlehem,  and  in  all  the  coasts  thereof,  from  two 
years  old  and  under."  No  precautions  are  stated  to  have 
been  taken  in  the  case  of  the  infant  John.  He  may  have 
been  out  of  the  range  of  the  persecution. 

P. — I  must  say  I  am  unable  to  admire  the  wisdom  of  the 
wise  men.  It  was  an  act  of  great  imprudence  to  go  to  the 
capital  of  the  existing  king  and  openly  and  unguardedly  inquire 
for  the  child  who  was  to  supplant  him,  or  at  all  events  his 
dynasty  ;  and  the  least  measure  of  discernment  might  have 
shown  them  that  the  king  could  not  want  to  get  at  the  child 
to  worship  him,  without  their  requiring  a  special  revelation 
from  God  to  put  them  on  their  guard.  But  perhaps  Herod 
was  a  man  of  such  known  benevolence  and  piety  that  no  risk 
to  the  child  at  his  hands  was  to  be  apprehended. 

S.  On  the  contrary,  he  was  noted  for  his  cruelties.  "  His 
domestic  life  was  embittered  by  an  almost  uninterrupted  series 
of  injuries  and  cruel  acts  of  vengeance.  The  terrible  acts  of 
bloodshed  which  Herod  perpetrated  in  his  own  family,  were 
accompanied  by  others  among  his  subjects  equally  terrible,  from 
the  number  who  fell  victims  to  them."^ 

P.  The  conduct  of  these  men  would  lead  me  to  call  them 
the  foolish  men  of  the  east,  rather  than  the  wise  men.  I  can- 
not conceive  why  the  star  should  have  guided  such  persons  as 
these  on  the  mission  described.  They  seem  to  have  been 
brought  to  Jerusalem,  which  was  not  the  true  locality  where 

1  Smith's  Diet,  of  the  Bible,  Art.  Herod. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


311 


the  child  was,  just  as  it  were  for  the  mere  purpose,  through 
their  egregious  folly,  of  rousing  the  tyrant  to  fresh  acts  of 
bloodshed.  Nor  does  the  king  appear  to  have  taken  the  com- 
monest precautions  to  secure  his  ends.  With  the  whole  re- 
sources of  the  kingdom  at  his  command,  why  did  he  trust  to 
the  wise  men,  who  were  strangers  to  him,  and  from  a  foreign 
land,  bringing  him  the  intelligence  about  the  child,  without 
seeking  for  it  himself  ?  And  how  was  it  he  did  not  even  learn 
of  the  flight  to  Egypt,  and  so  follow  up  the  fugitives  rather 
than  exterminate  the  wrong  infants  who  were  not  in  his  way  ? 
But  perhaps  Herod  was  as  imbecile  as  the  wise  men. 

S.  No.  He  was  a  man  of  remarkable  ability,  and  to  distin- 
guish him  from  others  of  the  same  name  he  is  known  in  history 
as  Herod  the  Great. 

P. — Then  I  must  needs  charge  the  imbecility  on  the  writer 
of  the  narrative,  who  puts  together  particulars  too  destitute  of 
probability  to  pass  for  real  facts.  However,  we  appear  to  have 
in  Herod  an  historic  character.  In  the  account  of  his  mis- 
deeds, is  this  slaughter  of  the  infants  at  Bethlehem  and  its 
neighbourhood  mentioned  ? 

;Sf. — The  event  was  certainly  of  a  character  to  attract  the 
attention  of  an  historian,  but  it  is  unnoticed  by  any.  Josephus, 
for  example,  "  though  he  devoted  a  considerable  portion  of  his 
history  to  the  reign  of  Herod,  and  does  not  spare  his  reputa- 
tion," makes  no  mention  of  this  atrocity.^ 

P. — If  there  was  this  risk  for  the  infant  from  Herod,  how 
could  he  have  been  taken  to  the  temple  forty  days  after  his 
birth,  and   there  proclaimed  openly  as  the  Messiah,  without 
drawing  down  the  danger  ? 
S. — I  am  unable  to  say. 

P. — And  if,  after  thus  visiting  the  temple,  the  family  im- 
mediately went  away  to  Nazareth,  as  narrated  by  Luke,  how 
could  they  have  fled  to  Egypt,  waited  there  till  the  death  of 
Herod,  and  then  resorted  to  Nazareth,  without  going  near 
Jerusalem  or  the  temple  ? 

S. — On  this  no  proper  explanation  can  be  given.  The 
statements  are  so  discordant  that  if  you  receive  the  one  you 
must  reject  the  other. 

p. — Can  you  account  for  the  introduction   in  Matthew  of 

1  Greg's  Creed  of  Christendom,  92. 


312 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


Period  of 
birth  of 
Jesus. 


Adoles- 
cence of 
Jesus. 


this  evidently  unhistorical  narrative  respecting  Herod's  slaugh- 
ter of  the  children  ? 

S. — Matthew  makes  numerous  efforts  at  establishing:  the 
title  of  Jesus  to  be  accepted  as  the  Messiah,  by  applying  pas- 
sages to  him  from  the  Old  Testament  to  which  he  gives  pro- 
phetic import.  He  does  so  on  the  present  occasion,  saying 
that  the  return  from  Egypt  fulfilled  what  Hosea  had  said, 
"  Out  of  Egypt  have  I  called  my  son."  The  flight  into  Egypt 
gave  thus  the  needed  occasion  for  bringing  Jesus  again  out  of 
Egypt.  At  the  time  of  the  birth  of  Moses,  Pharaoh  slaugh- 
tered the  Israeli tish  infants,  and  Moses,  in  a  remarkable 
way,  escaped,  and  this  may  have  suggested  the  similar  action 
attributed  to  Herod,  with  the  corresponding  escape  of  Jesus. 

P. — Are  there  data  for  •  ascertaining  the  time  when  Jesus 
was  born  ? 

S. — He  is  stated  to  have  "  began  to  be  about  thirty  years 
of  age,"  "  in  the  fifteenth  year  of  the  reign  of  Tiberius  Caesar" 
(Luke  iii,  1,  23).  That  implies  that  he  was  born  fifteen  years 
before  the  death  of  the  previous  emperor  Augustus. 

P. — How  does  that  date  consort  with  the  facts  of  the  his- 
tory ? 

S.  Not  at  all.  It  has  been  discovered  from '  history  "  that 
at  the  time  fixed  on  for  the  birth  of  Christ,  king  Herod  the 
Great  had  been  dead  nearly  four  years,"  so  that  either  "the 
history  of  Christ's  persecution  by  Herod  the  Great  is  fictitious, 
or  else,  in  the  fifteenth  year  of  Tiberius,  Jesus  began  to  be — 
not  about  thirty  but  about  thirty-four  years  of  age."^ 

P.^So  that  Matthew's  narrative  respecting  the  wise  men, 
the  persecution  of  Herod,  and  the  flight  to  Egypt,  is  found  to 
be  as  unhistorical  as  the  taxation  spoken  of  by  Luke ! 

You  say  that  between  the  birth  of  Jesus  and  the  commence- 
ment of  his  public  ministry,  thirty  years  afterwards,  there  is 
nothing  recorded  of  him  but  a  visit  he  paid  with  his  parents 
to  the  temple  at  the  age  of  twelve.  This  dearth  of  material 
reminds  me  very  much  of  the  history  of  the  Israelites  during 
their  wanderings  in  the  wilderness,  where  we  have  ample 
details  about  them  at  the  outset,  and  then  little  or  nothing 
said  about  them  till  the  close  of  their  pilgrimage,  forty  years 
later.     They  are  histories  with  beginnings  and  ends  and  no 

»  Giles'  Christian  Records,  123. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


313 


with  John. 


body,  giving  them  a  very  unreal  aspect.  It  would  have  been 
interesting  to  know  how  the  God-child  developed  into  the  God- 
man,  and  what  his  training  and  occupation  in  the  hands  of 
earthly  parents  might  have  been. 

S. — All  that  we  are  told  is  that  he  resided  with  his  parents 
"  and  was  subject  unto  them,  and  increased  in  wisdom  and 
stature  and  in  favour  with  God  and  man"  (Luke  ii.  51, 
52)  ;  and  he  is  referred  to  as  "  the  carpenter,  the  son  of  Mary" 
(Mark  vi.  3),  which  supports  the  statement  you  will  remember 
I  told  you  is  made  by  Justin  Martyr,  that  he  worked  as  one  in 
the  construction  of  ploughs  and  other  agricultural  implements.-^ 

P. — I  must  say  that  this  places  Jesus  before  us  in  the  light 
of  a  mere  human  being.  It  was  a  poor  sort  of  introduction  to 
the  God -like  role  he  had  afterwards  to  play.  Could  his  parents 
have  been  satisfied  of  his  divine  origin,  and  yet  have  put  him 
to  such  servile  occupation  ?  How,  moreover,  can  a  divine  being, 
who  must  ever  have  been  perfect,  be  found  increasing  in  wis- 
dom and  favour  with  God  as  one  that  had  to  be  perfected  ? 

What  were  his  relations  with  his  precursor  John  the  Baptist?  Relations 

S. — The  mothers  of  the  two  were  cousins,  and  the  birth  ol 
each  had  been  announced  in  a  similar  manner  by  the  angel 
Gabriel.  The  one  was  to  prepare  the  way  for  the  other.  As  soon 
as  the  angel  had  quitted  Mary,  she  went  and  visited  Elizabeth, 
and  at  her  approach  the  foetus  in  the  womb  of  the  latter  leapt 
with  joy  in  recognition  of  the  mother  of  the  Lord.  Thus  deep 
laid  was  the  association  between  the  two.  Their  career  began 
at  the  same  time,  namely  in  the  fifteenth  year  of  the  reign  of 
Tiberius  Csesar  (Luke  iii.  1-3,  23).  As  Jesus  was  about  to 
enter  on  his  mission,  and  before  they  had  met  in  what  may  be 
called  their  ofiicial  capacities,  John  shows  full  knowledge  of 
his  fellow-worker.  When  people  were  wondering  whether 
John  was  the  Christ,  he  repudiated  the  idea,  and  pointed  to  the 
coming  of  the  one  mightier  than  himself,  whose  baptism  was 
to  be  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  who  was  to  "  gather  the  wheat 
into  his  garner,"  but  to  burn  up  the  "  chaff,  with  fire  unquench- 
able "  (Luke  iii.  15-17).  Jesus  then  presents  himself  to  John 
for  baptism,  and  after  he  had  undergone  the  rite,  "  the  heavens 
were  opened"  and  "  the  Spirit  of  God"  was  seen  "  descending 
like  a  dove  and  lighting  upon  him,"  and  then  there  came  "  a 

1  Ante,  p.  33. 


I  , 


314. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


315 


I 


voice  from  heaven,  saying,  ''  This  is  my  beloved  son,  in  whom 
I  am  well  pleased."  But  the  accounts  differ,  where  no  disa- 
greement could  be  expected,  in  view  of  the  previous  connection 
between  the  parties  ;  namely,  as  to  whether  John  knew  who 
Jesus  was  when  he  came  to  him  for  baptism.  According  to 
Matthew  (iii.  14),  John,  who  had  just  proclaimed  his  advent, 
recognised  him,  evidently  as  the  Christ,  and  forbade  him,  say- 
ing, "  I  have  need  to  be  baptized  of  thee,  and  comest  thou  to 
me  ?"  According  to  John  (i.  32-34),  the  Baptist  did  not  know 
him,  and  the  Christ  had  to  be  pointed  out  to  him.  "  I  saw," 
says  the  Baptist,  '*  the  Spirit  of  God  descending  from  heaven 
like  a  dove,  and  it  abode  on  him.  And  I  knew  him  not :  but 
he  that  sent  me  to  baptize  with  water,  the  same  said  unto  me, 
Upon  whom  thou  shalt  see  the  Spirit  descending,  and  remain- 
ing on  him,  the  same  is  he  which  baptizeth  with  the  Holy 
Ghost.  And  I  saw,"  adds  John,  "  and  bare  record  that  this  is 
the  Son  of  God." 

P' — The  voice  from  heaven  would  of  course  be  an  unmis- 
takeable  manifestation,  but  I  cannot  make  out  what  was  to  be 
understood  by  a  bird  descending  and  alighting  on  Jesus.  How 
was  it  to  be  known  that  this  bird  was  the  Holy  Ghost  ? 

S. — That  I  cannot  tell  you. 

-P. — The  discrepance  in  the  two  accounts  as  to  whether  John 
knew  w^ho  Jesus  w^as  when  he  came  to  be  baptized  is  certainly 
very  marked,  but  after  the  divine  recognition  of  Jesus  as  the  Son 
of  God  at  the  time  of  his  baptism,  John  should  have  been  in  no 
further  difficulty;  and  yet,  as  you  have  sho^vn  before,  when  Jesus 
was  giving  still  further  manifestation  of  his  divinity  in  healing  the 
sick,  casting  out  devils,  and  raising  the  dead,  John,  it  appears, 
was  in  doubt,  and  sent  some  of  his  disciples  to  know  whether 
Jesus  was  really  the  expected  Christ  or  not ! 

S. — Certainly  John's  need  for  making  the  inquiry  is  alto- 
gether inexplicable,  consistently  with  the  ample  means  of 
recognition  he  is  said  already  to  have  had. 

P' — And  there  is  also  the  ignorance  of  those  disciples  of 
John  whom  Paul  re-baptized.  John  was  the  appointed  fore- 
runner of  the  Christ,  and  surely  he  should  have  proclaimed 
Jesus  as  such,  especially  after  the  divine  recognition  of  Jesus 
he  had  witnessed  at  the  time  of  his  baptism. 

^' — John  did  so  proclaim  him.     When  he  saw  him  at  the 


I 


time  of  his  baptism,  he  said,  "  Behold  the  Lamb  of  God,  which 
taketh  away  the  sin  of  the  world."  And  meeting  him  again 
the  next  day,  he  exclaimed  to  two  of  his  own  disciples  who 
were  with  him,   "Behold  the  Lamb  of  God  I"  (John  i.  29, 

35-37). 

p. — We  seem  ever  involved  in  a  sea  of  inconsistencies. 

I  notice  another  very  serious  one  in  the  narrative  of  the  The  temp- 
events  at  this  stage  of  the  history  which  you  have  given  me,  ^*'**''- 
namely,  that  it  would  appear,  according  to  one  evangelist,  that 
immediately  after  his  baptism  Jesus  was  occupied  for  forty 
days  with  his  temptation  by  the  devil,  and,  according  to  an- 
other, that  three  days  subsequently  to  the  baptism  he  was 
performing  the  miracle  of  turniag  the  water  into  wine. 

^. — It  is  so  certainly.  The  language  used  is  very  clear. 
*'And  there  came  a  voice  from  heaven,"  it  is  said  in  relatmg 
the  baptism,  "  saying.  Thou  art  my  Son,  in  whom  I  am  well 
pleased.  And  immediately  the  Spirit  driveth  him  into  the 
wilderness.  And  he  was  there  in  the  wilderness  forty  days, 
tempted  of  Satan"  (Mark  i.  11-13).  In  the  conflicting  ax;- 
count  the  days  there  in  question  are  carefully  indicated. 
John  is  asked  whether  he  is  the  Christ,  and  he  disclaims  the 
position  (John  i.  15-28).  "The  next  day"  the  baptism  of 
Jesus  occurs  (i.  29-34).  "Again  the  next  day"  he  proclaims 
Jesus  to  two  of  his  disciples  as  the  Lamb  of  God,  and  they 
follow  Jesus  to  his  place  of  residence  (i.  35-42).  "  The  day 
following  Nathanael  is  met  with,  and  makes  his  inquiry 
whether  any  good  thing  could  come  out  of  Nazareth  (i. 
43-51).  And  then  the  next  chapter  opens  with,  "And  the 
third  day"  (more  accurately  the  fifth  day),  "  there  was  a  mar- 
riage in  Cana  of  Galilee,"  after  which  the  account  comes  of  the 
miracle.  If  then  on  the  third  day  after  his  baptism  in  Jordan 
Jesus  is  found  to  be  in  Galilee,  it  is  clear  that  the  statement 
that  immediately  after  his  baptism  he  parsed  forty  days  m  the 
wilderness  of  Judea,  cannot  be  maintained. 

P.— As  usual,  we  have  two  accounts  which  conflict  so  much 

as  to  destroy  one  another. 

WiU  you  tell  me  about  the  apostles,  who  appear  to  have  been  m^^^ 
the  constant  attendants  of  Jesus,  and  I  presume  coadjutors  m 

his  ministry. 

^._They  were  to  be  twelve  in  number,  correspondmg  witU 


III 


816 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


317 


the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel.  For  example,  Jesus  declared  to 
them,  "  Verily  I  say  unto  you,  That  ye  which  have  followed 
me,  in  the  regeneration  when  the  Son  of  man  shall  sit  in  the 
throne  of  his  glory,  ye  also  shall  sit  upon  twelve  thrones,  judg- 
ing the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel"  (Matt.  xix.  28).  And  the 
heavenly  Jerusalem  is  to  have  twelve  gates,  on  which  are  to 
be  inscribed  "  the  names  of  the  twelve  tribes  of  the  children  of 
Israel,"  and  the  wall  of  the  city,  had  twelve  foundations,  "  and 
in  them  the  names  of  the  twelve  apostles  of  the  Lamb"  (Rev. 
xxi.  12,  14). 

P- — Are  these  names  all  clear  and  apparent  ? 

^- — That  is  not  the  case.  In  the  first  place,  though  the 
patriarch  Jacob  had  exactly  the  twelve  sons,  from  whom  the 
tribes  of  Israel  are  derived,  one  of  them,  Joseph,  became  re- 
presented in  his  two  sons  Manasseh  and  Ephraim,  so  that  the 
tribes  actually  became  thirteen.  In  regard  to  the  apostles  the 
difficulties  are  even  greater.  The  names  of  the  twelve  selected 
by  Jesus  are  given  by  the  first  three  evangelists,  but  they  are 
not  in  accord  with  each  other,  as  to  one  of  the  number.  Mark 
(iii.  18)  calls  him  Thaddseus.  Matthew  (x.  3)  says  he  was 
Lebbseus,  whose  surname  was  Thaddaeus,  but  Dr  Giles  declares 
the  latter  words  as  to  the  surname  to  be  an  interpolation,  as 
they  do  not  appear  in  the  early  manuscripts.^  Dr  Smith  also 
says  of  the  passage  that  "  Lebbseus  is  probably  the  original 
reading,"  ^  a  statement  which  apparently  excludes  Thaddaeus. 
Luke  (vi.  16)  calls  this  apostle  Judas,  stating  him  to  be  of 
James,  which,  according  to  rule,  would  mean  the  son  of  James  ; 
but  as  there  is  a  Jude,  the  writer  of  one  of  the  so-called  apos- 
tolic epistles,  who  is  described  as  the  "  brother  of  James,"  our 
translators  have  represented  this  apostle  Judas  to  be  such.  Dr 
Smith  has,  no  doubt,  felt  the  difficulty  of  reconciling  these 
names,  as  he  concludes,  without  however  having  authority  to 
support  him,  that  they  were  all  "  borne  by  one  and  the  same 
person."  Taking  matters,  however,  simply,  as  they  appear  in 
the  gospels,  we  find  the  three  writers,  who  give  the  names  of 
the  apostles,  all-in  agreement  as  to  those  of  eleven  of  them, 
and  all  at  issue  as  to  that  of  the  remaining  apostle. 

Then  there  is  the  difficulty  in  regard  to  Judas  Iscariot.  In 
giving  the  names  of  the  apostles,  the  evangelists  are  careful  to 
^  Christian  Records,  147,  note.  «  Diet,  of  Bible,  Art.  Thaddaeus. 


point  out  that  he  was  the  one  who  betrayed  Jesus.     He  did  so 
with  a  kiss,  for  a  paltry  sum  of  money,  after  which  he  met  with 
an  untimely  end  in  judgment  for  his  iniquity.     Peter,  in  the 
first  assembly  held  after  the.  death  of  Jesus,  proposed  to  elect  a 
substitute,  applying  a  passage  in  one  of  the  Psalms  to  signify 
that  Judas  had  been  deposed,  and  that  "  another"  was  to  ''  take 
his  bishopric."     They  thereupon  selected  two,  Barnabas  and 
Matthias,  as  qualified  for  the  post  of  apostle,  having  been  in 
company  with  the  others   through   the  whole   period  of  the 
public  career  of  Jesus,  from  his  baptism  to  his  resurrection, 
and  they  committed  it  to  the  Lord  to  decide,  by  lot,  which  of 
the  two  should  be  chosen.      "And  the  lot  fell  upon  Matthias ; 
and    he   was    numbered   with   the    eleven   apostles"    (Acts   i. 
15-26).     Thus  there  were  actually  thirteen  apostles,  but  one 
came  in  in  succession  to  one  deposed. 

Furthermore,    Paul,    everywhere    throughout    his    epistles, 
declares  himself  to  be  an  apostle.     He  states  he  was  "  called 
to  be  an  apostle  "  (Rom.  i.   1  ;  1  Cor.  i.  1),  and  "  ordained  " 
and  "  appointed  "  as  such  (1  Tim.  ii.  7  ;  2  Tim.  i.  11).     One 
requisition  for  the  office  was  that  the  individual  should  have 
been  with  Jesus  throughout  his  ministry.      This  qualification 
Paul   certainly  had  not,  but  he  lays  claim  to  what  he  repre- 
sents as  its  equivalent.     "  Am  I  not  an  apostle  ?  have  I  not 
seen    the    Lord?"  (1  Cor.  ix.  1),  evidently  referring    to    the 
vision  he  had  had  of  Jesus  at  the  time  of  his  conversion.     In 
this  way  he   associates  himself  with  the  body  of  the  apostles. 
*'  I  think,"  he  said,  "  that  God  hath  set  forth  us  the  apostles 
last,   as  it  were  appointed  to  death"  (1  Cor.  iv.  9)  ;  and  he 
speaks  of  the  others  as  having  been  "  apostles  before  him  "  (Gal. 
i.  17),  at  one  time  caUing  himself  "  the  least  "  of  the  number 
(1  Cor.  XV.  9),  and  at  another,  "'not  a  whit  behind  the  very 
chiefest "  of  them  (2  Cor.  xi.  5).     In  this  manner  there  were 

fourteen  apostles. 

p  —Had  Judas,  the  traitor,  the  same  power  and  privileges 
with  the  rest  of  the  apostles  while  of  the  body  ?  That  is,  was 
he  authorised  to  perform  miracles,  and  to  publish  the  doctrines 

then  promulgated  ?  j  i,       at. 

^  —Certainly  :  he  was  empowered  and  used  as  the  other 
apostles.  "For,"  they  testify  of  him,  "he  was  numbered 
with  us,  and  had  obtained  part  of  this  ministry  "  (Acts  i.  lO- 


818 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


319 


Call  of 
JMatthew. 


P. — Then  to  him  also,  equally  as  to  the  other  eleven,  the 
promise  of  Jesus  was  personally  made,  that  he  should  sit  on 
one  of  the  twelve  thrones,  judging  the  tribes  of  Israel. 

S. — Assuredly  he  was  one  of  the  twelve  to  whom  this 
promise  was  addressed. 

P. — And  how,  with  fourteen  persons  to  deal  with,  and  the 
name  of  one  of  the  original  apostles  absolutely  uncertain,  is 
the  inscription  of  the  twelve  names  on  the  foundations  of  the 
wall  of  the  heavenly  Jerusalem  to  be  carried  out  ? 

S. — It  would  take  a  wiser  person  than  either  you  or  I  to 
decide  that. 

P. — Are  there  any  incidents  recorded  of  the  circumstances 
under  which  any  of  the  original  apostles  were  called  upon  to 
follow  Jesus  ? 

S. — There  are ;  but  the  accounts  are  very  discordant. 
There  is  the  call  of  Matthew.  He,  in  the  list  given  in  the 
gospel  bearing  his  name,  is  designated  "  Matthew  the  pub- 
lican," and  is  said  (Matt.  ix.  9)  to  have  been  found  by  Jesus 
"  sitting  at  the  receipt  of  custom  "  in  exercise  of  his  vocation. 
Jesus  said  to  him,  "  Follow  me,"  and  he  at  once  "  arose  and 
followed  him."  Jesus,  then,  is  entertained  in  a  house  in 
company  with  "many  publicans  and  sinners."  Mark  (ii.  14), 
and  Luke  (v.  27),  say  that  the  person  so  called  was  Levi,  and 
that  it  was  at  his  house  that  the  entertainment  was  given. 
The  name  of  Levi  is  not  among  those  of  the  selected  twelve  ; 
so  that  this  man  was  an  undistinguished  disciple,  and  not 
one  of  the  apostles. 

There  were  two  pairs  of  brothers  among  the  apostles, 
namely,  Peter  and  Andrew,  and  James  and  John.  According 
and  James  to  Matthew  (iv.  18-22),  when  Jesus  was  "  walking  by  the  sea 
of  Galilee,"  he  saw  Peter  and  Andrew  "  casting  a  net  into  the 
sea,"  and  on  calling  to  them  to  follow  him,  "  they  straight- 
way left  their  nets,  and  followed  him."  *'  And  going  on  from 
thence,"  he  saw  James  and  John  ''  in  a  ship,  with  Zebedee, 
their  father,  mending  their  nets  ;  and  he  called  them.  And 
they  immediately  left  the  ship  and  their  father,  and  followed 
him."  Mark's  account  agrees  with  this,  but  that  of  Luke 
differs.  The  locality  is  the  same,  namely,  "  the  lake  of  Gen- 
nesaret  ;"  but  the  circumstances  vary.  Jesus,  it  is  said,  "  saw 
two  ships  standing  by  the  lake  :  but  the  fishermen  were  gone 


Call  of 
Peter  and 

Andrew, 


• 


out  of  them,  and  were  washing  their  nets."     The   four  were 
thus  all  together  and  occupied  in  the  same  manner,  but  not  in 
either  of  the  ways  spoken  of  by  Matthew  and   Mark.     Jesus 
"  entered  into  one  of  the  ships,  which  was  Simon's,  and  prayed 
him  that  he  would   thrust  out  a  little   from  the   land.     And 
he  sat  down  and   taught  the  people  out  of  the  ship."     Simon, 
it   appears,  and   others,  must  have  entered   the   vessel   with 
Jesus  ;  for  he  says  to  Simon,  "  Launch  out  into  the  deep,  and 
let  down  your  nets  for  a  draught ; — and  when  they  had  this 
done,  they  inclosed  a  great  multitude  of  fishes ;   and  their  net 
brake.     And  they  beckoned  unto  their  partners,"  who  by  this 
time  "  were  in  the  other  ship,  that  they  should  come  and  help 
them.      And  they  came,  and  filled  both  the  ships,  so  that  they 
began  to   sink."     Peter,  and   those  who  were  with  him,  were 
astonished.      "  And  so  was  also  James  and  John,  the  sons  of 
Zebedee,  which  were   partners  with    Simon   (Peter)."      Jesus 
says  to  Peter,  "  From  henceforth  thou   shalt  catch  men  ; "  on 
which,    "when  they  had  brought   their   ships   to  land,   they 
forsook   all,    and   followed  him  "  (Luke  v.  1-11).     Andrew  is 
not  mentioned  in  this  narrative ;  but  it  may  be  assumed  that 
he  was  one  of  those  with  Peter.     The  account  in  John  is  alto- 
gether different  from  any  of  the  above.      The  scene  is  here  laid 
in  Judea,  near  the  Jordan,  where  John  the  Baptist  was  bap- 
tising.     The  day  after  he  had  baptised  Jesus,  he  proclaimed 
him,  as  I  have  before  stated,  to  be  the  Lamb  of  God.      John 
had  then  with  him  two  of  his  own  disciples  who  heard  what 
he  had  said,   "  and  they  followed  Jesus."     Jesus  takes  them 
to  his  abode.      "And  one  of  the  two,"  we  are  told,   "which 
heard   John  speak,  and  followed    him,  was   Andrew,    Simon 
Peter's  brother.      He  first  findeth  his  own  brother  Simon,  and 
saith  unto  him.  We  have  found  the  Messias,  which  is,  being 
interpreted,    the    Christ.      And   he   brought   him  to   Jesus" 
(John  i.  35-42).       In  this  manner  Peter  and  Andrew  were 
gained  over.      The  call  of  the  other  couple,  James  and  John, 
is  not  given  by  this  evangelist,  and  his  narrative  in  fact  ex- 
cludes their  presence,  as  he  passes  on  to  show  how  Philip  and 
one  Nathanael  were  brought  in. 

p. — Certainly,  if  these  evangelists  had  designed  to  contra- 
dict one  another,  they  could  hardly  have  done  so  more  effec- 
tually.    Luke,  I  observe,  introduces  a  miraculous  draught  of 


320 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


The 
seventy. 


The  end  of 
Judas. 


fishes,  but,  as  usual  with  the  reciters  of  marvels,  he  falls  into 
inconsistencies.  If  the  net  broke  while  they  were  hauling  it 
in,  how  is  it  that  the  fish  did  not  escape  ?  And  is  it  con- 
ceivable that  practised  boatmen,  as  they  were,  would  have  filled 
their  vessels  with  fish  to  a  point  to  bring  them  to  sinking  ? 

There  was  another  select  body  of  seventy  who  were  sent 
out  to  work  miracles.      Who  were  they  ? 

S. — No  one  knows.  Their  names  are  nowhere  mentioned. 
Luke  alone  speaks  of  them. 

P. — Can  his  introduction  of  this  body  be  traced  to  any 
cause  ? 

S. — None  can  be  suggested  but  that  he  may  have  been 
taking  Moses's  act  in  supporting  himself  with  seventy  elders 
(Ex.  xxiv.  1,  9)  as  a  type.  Both  twelve  and  seventy  are 
numbers  so  frequently  employed  in  Hebraic  representations 
as  to  show  they  were  considered  mystical  or  sacred  numbers. 

-P. — What  became  of  the  apostles  ?  and  what  evidence  have 
they  left  behind  them  of  their  personal  reality  ? 

^S'. — The  end  of  Judas  Iscariot  is  related,  but  certainly  in 
different  ways.  He  received  thirty  pieces  of  silver  from  the 
chief  priests  as  the  price  of  his  treachery.  Matthew  (xxvii. 
3-8)  says  that  when  he  saw  the  consequences  of  his  act,  he 
was  overwhelmed  with  remorse,  "  and  brought  again  the  thirty 
pieces  of  silver  to  the  chief  priests  and  elders,  saying,  I  have 
sinned  in  that  I  have  betrayed  the  innocent  blood."  The 
reply  of  the  priests  is  stated  to  have  been,  "  What  is  that  to 
us  ?  see  thou  to  that."  On  which  the  unhappy  man  "  cast 
down  the  pieces  of  silver  in  the  temple,  and  departed,  and  went 
and  hanged  himself."  The  chief  priests  considered  it  unlawful 
to  put  the  money  into  the  treasury,  as  it  was  "  the  price  of 
blood,"  and  therefore  laid  it  out  in  the  purchase  of  a  field, 
which  became  known  as  ''  The  field  of  blood."  In  the  Acts 
(i.  18,  19),  the  representation  is  that  Judas  appropriated  the 
money,  and  expended  it  himself  in  the  purchase  of  the  field, 
and  came  by  his  death  in  a  different  way,  apparently  through 
an  accident.  "  Now  this  man,"  it  is  said,  ''  purchased  a  field 
with  the  reward  of  iniquity  ;  and  falling  headlong,  he  burst 
asunder  in  the  midst,  and  all  his  bowels  gushed  out."  And 
it  would  seem  that  it  was  owing  to  this  catastrophe,  namely 
to  the  blood  of  Judas  spilled  thereon,  and  not  to  the  blood  of 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


321 


Jesus  sold  for  the  purchase  money,  that  the  field  received   its 
appellation.      ''And  it  (what  befel  Judas,)  was  known,"  it  is 
added,  ''unto  all  the  dwellers  at  Jerusalem;   insorauchsis  that 
field  is  called  in  their  proper  tongue,  Aceldama,  that  is  to  sav 
The  field  of  blood." 

Paul  seems  to  have  known  nothing  of  the  ejection  and  death 
of  Judas,  for  while  the  evangelists  are  careful  to  point  out 
that  the  appearances  of  Jesus  after  death  were  made  to  the 
eleven,  the  place  of  Judas  being  then  vacant,  Paul  has  it  that 
he  showed  himself  to  the  twelve  (l  Cor.  xv.  5).  The  election 
of  Matthias,  it  must  be  observed,  did  not  occur  till  after  the 
ascension. 

The  fate  of  the  other  apostles  is  altogether  obscure.  They  Fateoftho 
have  passed  away,  for  the  most  part,  without  having  left  apostles, 
any  trace  behind  them  of  their  works  or  even  existence.  One 
John,  who  may  possibly  be  the  apostle  John,  though  that  is 
not  certain,  is  spoken  of  by  Irenaeus  as  known  to  Polycarp, 
whom  Irenaeus  saw  in  his  own  boyhood  about  fifty  years  before 
he  wrote.  1  As  to  the  rest,  they  may,  as  far  as  evidence  to 
reality  goes,  be  purely  mythical  characters.^  Two  of  the  gospels 
are  called  after  the  names  of  two  of  them,  but  unwarrantably 
so.  There  are  two  epistles  attributed  to  Peter,  of  which  one 
is  considered  spurious.  And  there  are  three  epistles  and  the 
Apocalypse  ascribed  to  John,  of  which  all  but  one  epistle  are 
called  in  question.  The  real  task  of  developing  the  doctrine 
of  Jesus  fell  upon  Paul,  who,  in  spite  of  his  pretensions,  cannot 
be  looked  upon  as  otherwise  than  a  self-constituted  teacher. 

-P- — What  was  the  character  of  the  dispensation  in  the  life-  Character 
time  of  Jesus  ?  Was  it  strictly  Jewish,  or  open  and  unex-  penL'tion: 
elusive,  as  is  the  Christian  dispensation  ? 

^' — Apparently  the  dispensation  remained  Jewish  without 
alteration  till  changed  by  the  death  of  Jesus.  He  said  he  had 
come,  not  to  destroy,  but  to  fulfil  the  law,  no  jot  or  tittle  of 
which  was  to  be  unobserved  (Matt.  v.  17,  18).  In  his  own 
person  he  underwent  circumcision,  and  the  prescribed  offering 
was  made  for  him  in  the  temple  in  redemption  of  him  as  a 
first-born    (Luke   ii.    21-24).      He   kept   the   passover  (Matt. 

1  Dr  Davidson  in  Theo.  Review,  No.  XXX.  299,  302. 

2  See  two  pamphlets  on  ''The  Twelve  Apostles,"  in  the  series  of  Mr  Thos. 
Scott  of  Ramsgate. 


322 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


xxvi.  1 8),  and  the  feasts  of  tabernacles  and  dedication  (John 
vii   2   lo';  x.  22),  and  purified  the  temple  (Matt.  xxi.  12,  13), 
and  on  curing  at  one  time  one  leper,  and  at  another  ten,  he 
told  them  all  to  go  and  show  themselves  to  the  priest,  and 
make  their  offering  as  Moses  had  commanded   (Luke  v.  14  ; 
xvii.  14).     But  he,  nevertheless,  discountenanced,  or  annulled, 
the  law  of  Moses,  on  several  occasions.      He  said,  "  Ye  have 
heard   that   it   hath  been   said.    An   eye   for   an    eye,   and   a 
tooth  for  a  tooth  :  but,"  he  added,  "  I  say  unto  you,  That  ye 
resist  not  evil :   but  whosoever  shaU  smite  thee  on  thy  right 
cheek,  turn  to  him  the  other  also."     And  he  went  on  m  the 
same  manner.      "  Ye  have  heard  that  it  hath  been  said,  Thou 
shalt  love  thy  neighbour,  and  hate  thine  enemy.      But  I  say 
unto  you,  Love  your  enemies"  (Matt.  v.. 33-44).      Then  there 
was  the  law  about  clean  or  unclean  animals  for  food,  which  he 
equally  set  at  nought.     ''  Not  that,"  he  declared,  "  which  goeth 
into  the  mouth  defileth  a  man  ;  but  that  which  cometh  out  of 
the  mouth"  (referring  to  the  expression  of  evil  thoughts),  "  this 
defileth  a  man"  (Matt.  xv.  11).     The  law  of  Moses  allowed  of 
arbitrary  divorcements.      A  man  might  put  away  his  wife  if 
there  was  anything  about  her  to  make  her  lose  ''  favour  m  his 
sight"  (Deut.  xxiv.  1).      Jesus  referred  to  this,  and  said,  as 
from  himself,  that  there  could  be  no  divorce  except  for  infi- 
delity   (Matt.    xix.    3-9).       He    even    encouraged    eunuchism 
(Matt.  xix.  10-12),  which  entailed  exclusion  from  all  religious 
communion  (Deut.  xxiii.  1).      And  when  a  woman  taken  in 
adultery  was  brought  before   him,   the  penal   consequence  of 
whose  act  was  death,  he  put  an  end  to  the  possibility  of  ex- 
ecuting that,  or  any  other  law,  by  requiring  that  the  execu- 
tioners should  be  themselves  free  of  all  taint  of  sin  of  any  sort. 
"  Neither,"  added  he,  when  no  one  could  take  up  a  stone  to 
throw  at  her  under  such  a  limitation  as  that,  "  do  I  condemn 
thee  :  go,  and  sin  no  more"  (John  viii.  3-11).     In  fulfilment 
of  a  supposed  prophecy  he  was  to  be  a  Nazarene  (Matt.  u.  23), 
meaning,  as  some  suggest,  that  he  was  to  be  a  Nazarite,  or  one 
who  had  devoted  himself  to  God.     But,  if  so,  he  broke  the  law 
of  the  Nazarite  (Num.  vi.  2-6)  in  two  respects  ;    namely,  m 
drinking  wine   (Matt.  xi.  19),  and  in  touching  a  dead  body 
(Matt.  ix.  25).      '*  Salvation,"  it  was  understood,  was  confined 
to  the  Jews,  with  whom  was  the  only  place  of  worship  which 
God  could  acknowledge  (John  iv.  20-22).     In  recognition  of 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


323 


their  exclusive  position  as  the  people  of  God,  when  he  sent  out 
the  apostles  to  preach,  he  restricted  them  to  ministering  among 
them.  "  Go  not,"  he  said,  '*  into  the  way  of  the  Gentiles,  and 
into  any  city  of  the  Samaritans  enter  ye  not :  but  go  rather  to 
the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel"  (Matt.  x.  5,  6).  And 
when  a  woman  of  Canaan  came  to  entreat  him  for  her  daughter, 
who  was  possessed  with  a  devil,  he  repelled  her,  saying,  "  I  am 
not  sent  but  unto  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel,"  finally 
yielding  to  her  repeated  solicitation,  to  the  abandonment,  be 
it  observed,  of  his  own  proclaimed  principle  (Matt.  xv.  22-28). 
At  another  time,  however,  he  appears  to  have  had  no  such 
scruples,  when  a  Roman  centurion  appealed  to  him  in  behalf  of 
his  palsied  servant,  on  which  occasion  he  put  the  applicant  on 
a  higher  level  than  the  privileged  Israelites  (Matt.  viii.  5-13). 
And  notwithstanding  his  positive  instructions  to  the  apostles 
not  to  enter  into  any  city  of  Samaria,  or  to  minister  among 
that  people,  he  had  no  difficulty,  apparently,  in  transgressing 
his  own  rule  himself.  There  are  two  accounts  of  his  progress 
from  Galilee  to  Jerusalem,  not  in  accord  as  to  the  time  when 
the  journey  was  made,  but  agreeing  that  his  course  lay  through 
Samaria.  According  to  John,  he  then  went  "to  a  city  of 
Samaria,  which  is  called  Sychar,"  and  falling  in  with  a  woman 
of  the  place  at  a  well,  revealed  himself  to  her  as  the  Messiah, 
and  through  this  channel  "  many  of  the  Samaritans  of  that 
city"  accepted  him  as  such  ;  and,  at  their  request,  "he  abo<le 
there  two  days,"  when  many  more  were  brought  to  believe  in 
him  (John  iv.  3-42).  According  to  Luke,  he  had  "steadfastly 
set  his  face  to  go  to  Jerusalem,"  and  "sent  messengers"  who 
"  entered  into  a  village  of  the  Samaritans  to  make  ready  for 
him.'^  These  people  would  not  receive  him,  upon  which  "  they 
went  to  another  village,"  presumedly  in  the  same  region  (Luke 
ix.  51-5G).  In  this  way  "he  passed  through  the  midst  of 
Samaria  and  Galilee,^'  and  "  as  he  entered  a  certain  villai^e," 
ten  lepers  appealed  to  him  for  help.  These  he  cured,  and  one 
of  them,  we  are  told,  "was  a  Samaritan"  (Luke  xvii.  11-16). 
Furthermore,  the  wise  men  from  the  East  who  honoured  him 
with  gifts  at  his  birth  were  apparently  Gentiles ;  the  promi- 
nent scene  of  his  ministry  was  a  region  so  peopled  with  this 
race  as  to  be  known  as  Galilee  of  the  Gentiles,  and  Gadara,  where 
he  wrought  a  notable  miracle,  was  a  locality  chiefly  Gentile. 


324j 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


P  _If  the  laws  enjoined  on  the  Jews  were  divine,  and  to 
be  respected  as  such,  what  could  be  thought  of  a  teacher  who, 
coming  among  them  with  the  avowal  that  these  laws  were  to 
be  maintained  in  every  point,  yet  openly  set  them  aside,  and 
substituted  for  them  rules  shaped  according  to  his  better  sense 
of  what  the  conduct  of  mankind  should   be  ?     What  was  this 
but  to  set  up  free-will  in  heu  of  law,  and  so  to  unsettle,  and 
do    away   with,  every  restraint  ?       And    to  whatever  extent 
Jesus   maintained   the  Jewish  pretensions  to  exclusive  com- 
munion  with    God,    he  warred   against   the  actual   truth,  to 
man's  loss,  and  God's  dishonour.      Here  also  his  practice  and 
his  profession  were  not  in  accord,  and  the  whole  character  of 
these  representations  impresses  us  with  the  idea  of  the  insta- 
bility of  the  personage  described.     And  yet  he  is  to  be  viewed 
not  merely  as  a  God-appointed  teacher,  but  as  himself  Divme  ! 
I  see  no  conclusion  remaining  to  be  drawn  but  that  this  is  an 
ideal  history,  with  the  defects  inherent  to  such  an  attempt, 
especially  as  made  in  an  uncritical  and  ignorant  age. 
Purifica-  You  have  said  that  he  purified  the  temple.     What  are  the 

We '^''    circumstances?  .  •     -.   .  .v.        .i.., 

''"'  ^ —Jesus,  on  visiting  the  temple,  found  m  it      those  that 

sold  oxen  and  sheep  and  doves,  and  the  changers  of  money 
sittincr  .  and  when  he  had  made  a  scourge  of  small  cords,  he 
drove'them  all  out  of  the  temple,  and  the  sheep  and  the  oxen  ; 
and  poured  out  the  changers'  money,  and  overthrew  the  tables 
(John  ii  14  15)  ;  and  would  not  suffer  that  any  man  should 
carry  any  vessel  through  the  temple  "  (Mark  xi.  1 G).  Accord- 
ing to  John,  this  happened  at  the  beginmng  of  his  mmistry, 
an'd  according  to  the  other  evangelists  at  its  close. 

P.— How  did  the  sacred  edifice  come  to  be  thus  dese- 
crated ?  P     1  -x-  f 

S  —The  traffic  in  question  grew  out  of  the  necessities  ot 
the  temple  worship.  The  animals  exposed  for  sale  were  re- 
quired for  the  sacrifices. 

p. How  was  the  interference  submitted  to? 

6^ —Apparently  without  remonstrance  from  those  so  ejected. 

p  _Do  you  mean  to  say  that  one  man  could  act  thus  with 
violence  towards  a  number  of  others,  even  to  the  extent  of 
administering  flagellation,  and  put  an  end  to  their  busmess, 
with  its  attendant  gains,  and  yet  meet  with  no  opposition,— 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


325 


the  business,  moreover,  being  one  associated  with  their  religious 
services  ? 

S. — So  the  story  is  told. 

P. — Was  the  process  effectual  ? 

8. — What  the  ultimate  results  were  we  are  not  told. 
According  to  John,  Jesus  frequently  revisited  the  temple,  and 
to  be  consistent  should  have  interfered  again  if  the  practice 
he  had  objected  to  still  subsisted.  But  we  hear  of  no  further 
action  of  the  sort  on  his  part.  The  accounts  of  the  other  evan- 
gelists are  at  entire  variance  with  that  of  John,  for,  according 
to  them,  the  practice  was  in  force  at  the  close  of  the  ministry 
of  Jesus,  and  was  then  put  down  by  him,  under  circumstances 
to  show  that  he  had  never  taken  such  action  before. 

P. — This  is  a  strange  discrepancy  certainly,  if  there  is  any 
real  foundation  for  the  story.  Was  it  consistent  with  the 
doctrine  Jesus  held  forth,  that  a  man  should  take  the  law  into 
his  own  hands,  and  put  down  by  violence  what  he  might  dis- 
approve of? 

S. — On  the  contrary,  he  taught  just  the  reverse.  He  said 
of  himself,  ''I  am  meek  and  lowly  in  heart"  (Matt,  xi,  29), 
and  he  declared,  "  Blessed  are  the  poor  in  spirit.  Blessed  are 
the  meek."  "  Resist  not  evil,"  he  said,  "  Whosoever  shall 
smite  thee  on  thy  right  cheek,  turn  to  him  the  other  also. 
And  if  any  man  will  sue  thee  at  the  law,  and  take  away  thy 
coat,  let  him  have  thy  cloak  also  "  (Matt.  v.  3,  5,  39,  40). 

P. — His  practice  and  his  preaching  seem  to  have  been 
highly  inconsistent.  Was  this  open  interference  with  what 
stood  connected  with  the  temple  sacrifices  alleged  against  him 
when  he  was  finally  proceeded  against  ? 

S. — His  accusers  seem  to  have  been  at  their  wits'  end  to 
bring  matter  against  him,  but  no  one  appears  to  have  thought 
of  this  very  remarkable  handle  which  might  have  been  used 
to  his  prejudice. 

P. — The  tale  has  assuredly  the  characteristics  of  fiction 
throughout.  Does  the  contradiction  as  to  whether  the  event 
happened  at  the  beginning  or  the  end  of  the  ministry  of  Jesus 
involve  any  serious  discordance  as  to  time  ? 

S. — It  does.      The  first  three  evangelists  record  the  occur-  Duration 
rence  of  but  one  passover  during  the  ministry  of  Jesus,  namely  °^.  ■  . 
that  at  which  his  career  was  brought  to  a  close.      John,  on  the 


326 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


Recapitu- 
lation of 
discre- 
pancies in 
early 
history. 


Field  of 
ministry. 


other  hand,  has  him  officiating  through  a  period  embraced  by- 
three  passovers  (ii.  13,  23  ;  vi.  4  ;  xi.  55).  So  that  accord- 
ing to  the  first  three  the  ministry  of  Jesus  lasted  but  a  portion 
of  a  year,  while  pursuant  to  John  it  occupied  more  than  two 

years. 

P. — Would  you  be  good  enough  to  give  me  an  idea  of  the 
movements  of  Jesus  in  the  course  of  his  career,  pointing  out 
where  the  accounts  disagree. 

S, — Willingly.  This  map  will  enable  you  to  follow  me  in 
my  statements. 

I  have  already  mentioned  to   you  certain  serious  ditferences 
between  the  evangelists  in  the   early  part  of  the  history  of 
Jesus.      That  is,  Matthew  has  his  parents  residing  at  Beth- 
lehem at  the  time  of  his  birth,  while  Luke  brings  them  there 
specially  for  a  census  from  Nazareth,  which  he  represents  as 
their  place  of  abode.      Then  Matthew  has  them  flying  with 
Jesus   from   Bethlehem   to   Egypt,    and   returning   thence   to 
Nazareth ;  whereas  Luke  says  they  went  direct  from  Bethlehem 
to   Nazareth,  the  flight  to  Egypt,  and  its  causp^  having  no 
place  in  his  narrative.      I  have  shown  you   ..lat  Luke  brings 
Jesus  to  Jerusalem  at  the  age  of  twelve  in  company  with  his 
parents  for  the  passover,  a  circumstance  not  mentioned  by  the 
other    evangelists.      Furthermore,    the   first   three   evangelists 
describe  the  meeting  of  Jesus  with  John,  his  baptism  by  John, 
the  descent  upon  him  of  the  Holy  Ghost  with  a  voice  from 
heaven,  and  his  immediately  being  taken  to  the  wilderness  of 
Judea,  where  he  remained  forty  days  tempted  of  the  devil. 
The  fourth  evangelist,  on  the  other  hand,  mentions  the  meeting 
with  John,  and  the  divine  manifestations,  but  says  nothing  of 
the  baptism  of  Jesus  ;  and  three  days  after  this  meeting  he 
places  Jesus  at  Cana  in  Galilee,  where  he  performs  the  miracle 
of  changing  water  into  wine.      John  thus  excludes  the  tempta- 
tion, while  the  other  evangelists  exclude  the  miracle  at  Cana. 

We  are  brought  now  to  the  period  of  the  public  ministry  of 
Jesus. 

Matthew  says  that  after  his  temptation  Jesus  returned  to 
Galilee  (iv.  12) ;  then  proceeded  from  Nazareth  to  Capernaum 
(iv.  13)  ;  then  went  preaching  through  all  Galilee  (iv.  23); 
afterwards  ascended  a  mountain,  and  gave  forth  that  discourse 
currently  called  his  sermon  on  the  mount  (v.  1) ;   then  entered 


327 


Capernaum  (viii.  5)  ;  was  on  the  sea  of  Galilee  in  a  storm 
(viii.  24)  ;  visited  the  country  of  the  Gergesenes  (viii.  28) ; 
returned  to  Nazareth,  where  he  performed  a  noted  miracle  on 
a  man  sick  of  the  palsy  (ix.  1)  ;  went  through  the  cities  and 
villages  round  about  (ix.  35)  ;  preached  in  the  cities  (xi.  1) ; 
upbraided  those  in  which  he  had  most  worked,  naming  Chora- 
zin  and  Bethsaida  (xi.  21) ;  was  by  the  sea  side  (xiii.  1) ;  re- 
turned to  Nazareth  (xiii.  54) ;  on  hearing  of  John's  death 
withdrew  by  ship  to  a  desert  place  (xiv.  1 3) ;  crossed  the  sea 
to  the  other  side  (xiv.  22) ;  was  again  on  the  sea  and  landed 
at  Gennesaret  (xiv.  34)  ;  went  to  the  border  of  Tyre  and 
Sidon  (xv.  21)  ;  came  back  to  the  sea  of  Galilee  (xv.  29); 
went  by  ship  to  the  coast  of  Magdala  (xv.  39)  ;  crossed  to  the 
other  side  (xvi.  5);  went  to  the  neighbourhood  of  Caesarea 
Philippi  (xvi.  13);  ascended  the  mount  where  he  was  trans- 
figured, having  Moses  and  Elias  with  him  (xvii.  1)  ;  was  still 
in  Galilee  (xvii.  22) ;  went  to  Capernaum  (xvii.  24)  ;  and 
then  set  out  on  his  journey  to  Jerusalem  where  he  met  his 
end  (xix.  1). 

Mark  and  Luke  describe  the  same  course  in  very  general 
concurrence  with  Matthew,  the  details  in  Mark  being  the 
fullest  and  closest  in  accord.  Mark,  however,  places  the  cur- 
ing of  the  palsied  man  at  Capernaum,  on  the  second  visit  made 
to  that  place  (ii.  1),  and  Luke  does  not  say  where  it  occurred, 
Jesus  being  last  spoken  of  by  him  as  in  the  wilderness  (v. 
16-18).  Luke,  moreover,  says  that  what  is  known  as  the  ser- 
mon on  the  mount  was  delivered  on  a  plain  to  which  Jesus 
descended  from  a  mountain  (vi.  1 7),  and  he  places  the  event 
after  the  curing  of  the  palsied  man. 

These  evangelists  thus  concur  in  confining  the  ministrations 
of  Jesus  to  Galilee,  not  bringing  him  to  Judea  or  Jerusalem 
till  he  comes  there  at  the  close  of  his  career.  John's  account 
is  a  very  different  one.  Having  taken  Jesus  to  Cana  of 
Galilee  (ii.  1),  he  states  that  he  went  to  Capernaum  (ii.  12), 
and  then  attended  the  passover  at  Jerusalem  (ii.  1 3).  There 
is  now  a  new  episode  connected  with  John.  He  is  found  bap- 
tizing at  ^non,  on  the  Jordan,  the  point  where  he  first  bap- 
tized being  lower  down,  at  Bethabara ;  and  to  this  neighbourhood, 
which  is  in  Samaria,  Jesus  comes  and  carries  out  the  rite, 
baptizing,  through  the  instrumentality  of  his  disciples,  more 


328 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


329 


persons  than  John.      John,  it  is  pointed  out,  had   ''  not  yet  '* 
been  ''cast  into  prison"  (iii.  22-24  ;  iv.  1,  2).      Pursuant  to 
the  other  evangelists,  the  ministry  of  Jesus  did  not  begin  till 
after  John  had  been  thrown  into  prison,  nor  do  they  attribute 
to  him  the  dispensing  of  baptism.      But  the  fourth  evangelist, 
as  we  see,  has  him  enacting  a  miracle  in  Galilee,   and  sur- 
rounded  by   disciples,   before   John's   ministrations  had   been 
brought  to   a  close   by  his   incarceration.     After  this  Jesus, 
according  to  John,   left  Judea  for  Galilee   (iv.    3),   and   then 
visited  Sychar  in  Samaria,  where  he  obtained  many  adherents 
(iv.  5),  a  fact  unmentioned  in  the  other  gospels.      He  again 
returns  to  Galilee  (iv.  43),  and  revisits  Cana  (iv.  46).      After 
this  he  proceeds  a  second  time  to  attend  a  feast  at  Jerusalem 
(v.  1),  and  is  found  afterwards  on  the  sea  of  Galilee  (vi.  1). 
The  second  passover  is  then  said  to  be  near  at  hand,  but  we 
are  not  told  whether  he  presented  himself  at  it  (vi.  4).      We 
hear  of  him  next  on  a  mountain  (vi.  1 5),  and  then  as  crossing 
the  sea  to  Capernaum  (vi.  17).      Afterwards,  he  is  still  teach- 
ing at  Capernaum  (vi.  5.9),  and   then  moves  about  in  Galilee 
(vii.  1).     For  the  third  time  he  visits  Jerusalem  at  the  feast 
of  tabernacles  (vii.  10),  is  seen  on  the  mount  of  Olives  (viii.  1), 
and  resorts  to  the  temple  (viii.  2),  and  is  still  at  Jerusalem  in 
winter  at  the  feast  of  dedication  (x.  22).      Nor  is  he  elsewhere 
than  in  Judea  till  his  death. 

Matthew  and  Luke  certainly  attribute  a  speech  to  Jesus 
which  could  not  consistently  have  been  uttered  unless  his 
ministrations  in  Jerusalem  had  been  frequent.  At  his  final 
visit  he  is  said  to  have  exclaimed,  "0  Jerusalem,  Jerusalem — 
how  often  would  I  have  gathered  thy  children  together,  even 
as  a  hen  gathereth  her  chickens  under  her  wings,  and  ye  would 
not  "  (Matt,  xxiii.  37  ;  Luke  xiii.  34) ;  but  for  any  such 
attempts,  unless  remote  and  indirect,  and  made  at  a  distance 
in  Galilee,  they  do  not  leave  an  opening.  They  profess  to 
record  the  whole  history  of  the  ministry  of  Jesus,  and  account 
for  him  from  place  to  place  till  he  finally  suffered  at  Jerusalem, 
and  as  they  never  bring  him  into  Judea  till  he  there  came  to 
his  end,  their  narratives  exclude  any  intermediate  operations 
in  Jerusalem,  and  render  it  difficult  to  believe  that  he  could 
have  uttered  the  words  here  imputed  to  him.  It  is  a  speech, 
possibly,  presented  for  effect,  and  to  afford  a  link  between 


Jesus  and  what  should  have  been  the  prominent  scene  of  his 
mission  as  the  Jewish  Messiah. 

It  remains  impossible  to  reconcile  these  respective  accounts. 
All  have  the  same  starting  point  for  the  ministry  of  Jesus, 
namely  the  time  that  he  met  with  John  baptizing  in  Jordan. 
The  first  three  evangelists  place  him  thenceforth  in  Galilee, 
till  the  approach  of  the  passover  which  brought  him  to  Jeru- 
salem, where  he  suffered,  the  whole  period  embracing  but  a 
portion  of  a  year.  John,  on  the  other  hand,  records  two  prior 
journeys  from  Galilee  to  Jerusalem,  for  which  the  other  evan- 
gelists have  no  place,  extends  his  ministry  over  three  passovers, 
and  brings  him  finally  to  Jerusalem  at  the  feast  of  tabernacles, 
which  was  held  in  the  month  of  Tisri,  or  October,  accounting 
for  him  there  to  his  last  passover,  held  in  Nisan,  or  April. ^ 
And  it  is  during  these  six  months,  from  October  to  April,  that 
the  other  evangelists  report  him  as  in  Galilee,  the  period  em- 
bracing the  chief  portion  of  the  labours  they  had  to  record. 

Nor  is  there  agreement  among  the  first  three  evangelists  as  Final 
to  the  journey  from  Galilee  to  attend  the  last  passover  at  j^enisafem. 
Jerusalem.  Pursuant  to  Matthew  (xix.  1),  it  was  taken  by 
"  the  coasts  of  Judea  beyond  Jordan,"  and  according  to  Mark 
(x.  1)  "  by  the  farther  side  of  Jordan."  That  is,  Jesus  left 
Galilee  by  crossing  the  Jordan,  kept  along  its  eastern  bank, 
and  then  recrossed  into  Judea  without  passing  through  Samaria. 
But  the  statement  of  Luke  is,  that  as  he  ''  set  his  face  to  go  to 
Jerusalem,"  he  sent  messengers  before  him  to  prepare  for  him, 
and  these  "  entered  into  a  village  of  the  Samaritans  to  make 
ready  for  him"  (ix.  51,  52);  and  he  goes  on  to  say  that  "as 
he  went  to  Jerusalem,"  "  he  passed  through  the  midst  of 
Samaria  and  Galilee"   (xvii.  11). 

The  discrepancies  prevail  to  the  end  of  these  narratives.  The  Ensuing 
last  stage,  according  to  the  first  three  gospels,  was  from  Jericho 
to  Jerusalem,  through  Bethany,  which  was  accomplished  in  one 
day  (Matt.  xx.  29  ;  xxi.  1  ;  Mark  x.  46  •,  xi.  1  ;  Luke  xix.  1, 
29).  Near  Jericho  Jesus  performed  a  cure  of  blindness.  Luke 
(xviii.  35)  says  that  this  was  wrought  upon  one  man  who  was 
sitting  by  the  wayside  begging,  and  that  this  was  as  they 
approached  Jericho.  Mark  (x.  46)  says  that  it  was  on  one 
man  so  sitting  as  they  were  leaving  the  place.      Matthew  (xx. 

^  Smith's  Diet.,  Articles,  Month,  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  and  Passover. 


330 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


29)  also  says  it  was  as  they  were  leaving  Jericho,  but  repre- 
sents that  there  were  two  blind  men  whose  sight  was  restored 
on  the    occasion.      The  entry  into  Jerusalem   is   made   with 
parade  upon  an  ass,  obtained  in  passing  at  Bethany.     Accord- 
ing to  Matthew  and  Luke,  Jesus  then  purged  the  temple  of  the 
money  changers   (Matt.  xxi.  12-16;  Luke  xix.  45,  46),   but 
Mark  observes  that  when  he  entered  the  temple  he  merely 
looked  about  him,  as  a  man  might  do  who  was  a  stranger  to 
the  place,  and  withdrew,  the  time  being  the  evening  ;  and   he 
says  that  the  purging  of  the  temple  occurred  the  following  day 
(xi.  11-16).      Matthew  and  Mark  agree  that  Jesus  lodged  that 
night  at  Bethany  (Matt.   xxi.   17;   Mark  xi.  11).      Matthew 
says  that  the  following  morning,  on  his  way  to  the  city,  he 
cursed   the   fig  tree,  which   immediately  withered   away  (xxi. 
18-20).      Mark  has  it  that  it  was  not  till  the  succeeding  morn- 
ing that  the  tree  was  seen  to  be  withered   (xi.  14,  19,  20), 
and  he  places  the  purification  of  the  temple  after  the   act  of 
the  cursing.      Matthew  goes  on  to  show  that  on  the  day  Jesus 
cursed  the  fig-tree,  being  the  day  after  he  had  reached  Jeru- 
salem, he  held  various  discourses  in   the  temple  and  on  the 
mount  of  Olives,  and  that  then  it  wanted  two  days   to  the 
passover    (xxi.    23  ;  xxii.    23  ;  xxiv.    1,   3  ;  xxvi.   1).      Mark 
gives  these  discourses  as  occurring  a  day  later,  his  account  of 
the  withering  of  the  fig-tree  having  introduced  an  additional 
day.      So  that  Matthew  places  the  arrival  of  Jesus  from  Galilee 
three  days  before  the  passover,  and  Mark  four  days.      Luke 
does  not  enable  us  to  reckon  the  days,  nor  does  he  say  that 
Jesus  returned  to  Bethany.     He  tells  us  that  ''  he  taught  daily 
in  the  temple,"  and  speaks  indefinitely  of  "  one  of  those  days, 
as  he  taught,"  and  mentions    that    "  in  the  day  time  he  was 
teaching  in  the  temple  ;  and  at  night  he  went  out,  and  abode 
in  the  mount  that  is  called  the  mount  of  Olives  "   (xix.  47  ; 
XX.    1  ;  xxi.    37).      Matthew  and   Mark  proceed  to   say  that 
when  in  a  certain  house  in  Bethany,  a  woman  came  in  and 
anointed  him  (Matt.  xxvi.  6-13  ;  Mark  xiv.    3-9),   but  Luke 
places  the  incident  in  the  early  part  of  the  ministry  of  Jesus 
while  he  was  in  Galilee   (vii.  36-48.)     The  three  evangelists 
agree  that  Jesus   kept   the  passover   with   the  apostles,  was 
arrested  the  same  night,  and  executed  the  following  day. 
The  narrative  of  John  is  altogether  independent  and  diverse. 


^ 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


331 


He  has  Jesus  in  Judea,  not  merely  three,  or  it  may  be  four 
days  before  the  passover,  as  stated  by  Matthew  and  Mark,  but 
six  months,  as  I  have  already  mentioned.     As  the  end  draws 
near,  we  find  him  "  where  John  at  first  baptized  ;  and  there 
he  abode"  (x.  40),  that  is,  at  Bethabara  on  the  Jordan.    There 
Martha  and  Mary  send  for  him  when  Lazarus  is  ill.    He  remains 
where  he  was  for  two  days  and  then  goes  to  them  at  Bethany. 
By  that  time  we  are  told  Lazarus  had  been  dead  four  days.  Jesus 
restores  him   to  life,  and   then  withdraws  to  a  place  called 
Ephraim  near  the  wilderness.     "  Six  days  before  the  passover" 
Jesus    returns   to  Bethany,  where  his   anointing  takes  place. 
From  the  time  of  the  raising  of  Lazarus,  the  chief  priests  and 
the  Pharisees,  we  learn,  "  took  counsel  together  for  to  put  him 
to  death."     The  miracle  had  brought  many  to  believe  on  Jesus, 
and  when  they  heard  he  was  coming  to   the   feast,  numbers, 
with  palm  branches  in  their  hands,  went  forth  to  greet  him  as 
the  King  of  Israel.      It  was  on  this  occasion  that  he  made  his 
entry  on  the  ass.     He  now  asks  God  to  glorify  his  name,  and 
"  then  came  there  a  voice  from  heaven "  in  response  to  his 
prayer.      After  this  we  hear  that  Jesus  ''  departed,  and  did 
hide  himself"   (xii.  36).      The  day  preceding  the  passover  he 
had  what  is  called  his  last  supper  with  the  apostles,  and  the  fol- 
lowing day  he  suffered.    The  scene  of  purging  the  temple  John 
lays  at  the  time  of  the  earliest  of  the  three  passovers  he  men- 
tions (ii.  13-15),  or  two  years  before   the  period  assigned   to 
the  act  by  the  other  evangelists.    The  intimacy  with  the  family 
at  Bethany  passes  unnoticed  by  these  three  evangelists,  nor  do 
they  mention  the  raising  of  Lazarus,  although  the  most  striking 
of  the  miracles,  and  attended  by  the  most  important  results ; 
nor  is  the  remarkable  voice  from  heaven,  coming  in  answer  to 
the  request  of  Jesus  for  such  a  demonstration,   spoken  of  by 
them.      The  discourses,  moreover,  by  Jesus,  in  these  his  last 
days,  are  altogether  different  as  represented  by  the  three  evan- 
gelists and   by  John,  and  are  introduced   at  different  times ; 
by  the  former  before  the  occurrence  of  the  last  supper,  and  by 
the  latter  subsequently  thereto. 

P. The  differences  you  point  out  appear  to  me  sufficient 

to  destroy  the  integrity  of  these  narratives  altogether.  There 
are  divergences  between  the  three  earlier  evangelists  which 
place  them  in  issue  to  a  degree  to  make  their  testimony  ques- 


332 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


833 


The 
anointing. 


tionable  ;  for  example,  connected  with  the  family  of  Jesus 
coming  to  Bethlehem  before  his  birth,  the  flight  to  Egypt,  the 
final  journey  from  GaUlee  to  Jerusalem,  the  purging  of  the 
temple,  and  the  anointing.  But  when  the  narrative  of  John 
is  also  taken  into  account,  I  find  it  impossible  to  believe  that 
these  histories  are  based  upon  actual  occurrences.  If  the 
ministry  of  Jesus  extended  over  more  than  two  years,  as  John 
declares,  why  should  the  others  have  brought  it  within  the 
limits  of  one  year  ?  And  if  during  the  last  six  months  of  his 
life  Jesus  was  labouring  in  Galilee,  as  the  three  evangelists 
represent,  what  could  have  led  John  to  describe  him  as  then 
in  Judea  ?  The  passover,  moreover,  was  an  occurrence  that 
could  not  fail  to  arrest  the  observation  of  Jewish  historians, 
and  yet  we  have  the  three  describing  Jesus  as  celebrating  it 
with  the  apostles,  while  John  has  him  executed  before  the  feast. 

What  are  the  circumstances  of  the  anointinof  ? 

S. — The  accounts  of  this  incident  will  be  found  at  Matt, 
xxvi.  6,  Mark  xiv.  3,  Luke  vii.  36,  and  John  xii.  1.  They 
are  so  dissimilar  that  some  are  driven  to  suppose  that  there 
were  two,  if  not  three  anointings.  Matthew  and  Mark  are,  as 
usual,  in  good  accord.  The  other  two  are  divergent.  But 
while  there  are  contradictions  of  detail  which  cannot  be  recon- 
ciled, there  are  points  of  agreement  which  show  that  all  were 
certainly  describing  the  same  event. 

For  example,  all  say  that  the  anointing  took  place  while 
Jesus  sat  at  meat,  that  it  was  administered  by  a  female,  and 
that  the  act  was  objected  to,  and  those  who  place  the  occur- 
rence latest  in  point  of  time,  namely  Matthew  and  Mark,  show 
that  such  a  thing  had  not  happened  before,  as  it  was  to  be 
recorded  as  a  special  memorial  of  the  woman's  devotion, 
"  wheresoever  this  gospel  shall  be  preached  in  the  whole 
world."  At  the  same  time  they  do  not  name  the  woman, 
and  thus  make  void  the  celebration  of  her  fame.  Matthew, 
Mark,  and  John  further  agree  that  it  occurred  a  few  days  before 
the  last  passover,  and  at  Bethany ;  Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke 
specify  the  name  of  the  owner  of  the  house  to  have  been  Simon  ; 
these  three  state  the  ointment  to  have  been  in  an  alabaster 
box,  and  Mark  and  John  particularize  that  it  was  of  spikenard  ; 
Matthew,  Mark,  and  John  say  that  the  objection  taken  was 
that  the  ointment  might  have  been  sold  for  the  benefit  of  the 


poor,  Mark  and  John  specifying  three  hundred  pence  as  the 
sum  it  might  have  fetched ;  and  Matthew,  Mark,  and  John 
say  that  Jesus  met  this  by  observing  that  they  had  the  poor 
always  with  them,  and  that  the  anointing  was  for  his  burial. 

So  far  as  to  the  points  of  accord,  which  are  too  numerous, 
and  too  decided,  to  allow  of  any  other  conclusion  than  that  the 
narrators  have  been  describing  one  and  the  same  circumstance. 
The  points  of  disagreement  are  these.      Matthew  and  Mark 
say  that  it  happened  two  days  before  the  last  passover,  John 
six  days,  and  Luke  at  a  much  earlier  period.      Matthew  and 
Mark  introduce  it  as  occurring   after   the  public  entry  into 
Jerusalem,  while  John  says  the  entry  took  place  the   "  next 
day"  after  the  anointing.      Matthew,  Mark,  and  John  place  it 
at  Bethany  in  Judea,  and  Luke  in  Galilee  before  Jesus  came 
to  Judea.      Matthew  and  Mark  describe  the  owner  of  the  house 
where  it  occurred  as  Simon  the  leper,  an3  Luke  as  Simon  the 
Pharisee,  who  however,  possibly,  may  also  have  been  a  leper  ; 
John  says  it  was  at  the   house  of  Lazarus  whom  Jesus  had 
raised  from  the  dead.      Matthev/  and  Mark  say  that  while  they 
were  seated  at  meat,  the  woman,  who  administered  the  anoint- 
ing,  came  and  effected   her  purpose.      They  do  not  describe 
her  by  name,  or  otherwise,  and  leave  the  impression  that  she 
was  some  stranger  who  came  in.     Luke  does  not  name  the 
woman,  but  speaks  of  her  as  a  well-known   "  sinner."     John 
says  she  was  Mary  the  sister  of  Lazarus.      Now  as  Luke  shows 
a  knowledge  of  Mary  and  her  sister  Martha,  and    that   Mary 
was  remarkable  for  her  piety  (x.  38-42),  the  contradiction  is 
absolute  that   Mary  was  not  the  woman  of  whom  he  spoke. 
Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke  state  that  the  woman  had  the  oint- 
ment with  her  in  a  box  when  she  came,  and  Mark  adds  that 
she  broke  the  box  in  order  to  make  use  of  its  contents.      This 
is  in  keeping  with  her  being  a  stranger,  coming  into  the  house 
for  the  pui-pose  in  question.      John,   having  in  view  that  she 
was  an  inmate  of  the  house,  says  that  she  "  took  a  pound  "  of 
the  ointment,  as  if  she  had  weighed  it  out  from  a  store  already 
in  the  house.    Matthew  and  Mark  state  that  the  woman  poured 
the  ointment  on  the  head  of  Jesus ;   Luke  and  John  that  she 
applied  it  to  his  feet,  afterwards  wiping  his  feet  with  her  hair ; 
Mark  says  that  ''some"   present  objected  to   the  use  of  the 
ointment ;  Matthew,  that  it  was  the  ''  disciples"  of  Jesus  who 


334 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


Associa- 
tion with 
family  of 
Lazarus. 


did  so  ;  John,  that  it  was  "  one  of  his  disciples,"  namely 
''Judas  Iscariot;"  and  Luke  that  it  was  Simon  the  host. 
Matthew,  Mark,  and  John  represent  the  objection  to  have  been 
uttered  openly  ;  Luke,  that  it  arose  merely  in  the  mind  of  the 
objector,  Jesus  reading  his  thoughts  and  replying  thereto. 
Matthew,  Mark,  and  John  say  that  the  objection  taken  was  to 
the  waste  of  the  ointment,  which  might  have  been  sold  and 
the  proceeds  applied  to  the  poor,  Jesus  replying  that  the  poor 
could  be  always  dealt  with,  while  he  was  about  to  part  from 
them,  and  the  ointment  was  in  preparation  for  his  burial. 
Lukei  on  the  other  hand,  states  that  the  objection  was  that 
Jesus  should  have  suffered  the  contamination  of  being  touched 
by  a  sinner,  which  he  meets  by  lauding  the  woman  for  her 
devotion  to  himself,  and  forgiving  her  all  her  sins. 

p. Certainly,  it  is  impossible  to  reconcile  these  discrepan- 
cies with  the  idea  that  the  parties  had  any  personal  knowledge 
of  the  event  described.  One  account  so  negatives  the  other, 
that  no  reliance,  especially  at  this  distance  of  time,  can,  it 
seems  to  me,  be  placed  on  any  of  these  statements. 

I  observe  that,  according  to  John,  Jesus  is  again,  at  the 
time  of  the  anointing,  at  the  house  of  Lazarus.  Do  the  other 
evangelists  mention  this  person,  or  speak  of  the  associations  of 

Jesus  with  the  family  ? 

S. None  of  them  show  that  they  had  any  knowledge  of 

Lazarus.  John  makes  it  appear  that  Jesus  had  a  personal 
regard  for  him  and  his  sisters  (John  xi.  5,  36),  which,  of 
course,  involves  intimacy.  When  the  sisters  send  for  Jesus  at 
the  time  of  the  illness  of  Lazarus,  they  do  so  in  these  terms, 
"  Lord,  behold,  he  whom  thou  lovest  is  sick,"  and  at  his  death 
Jesus  was  so  moved  by  the  prevailing  grief  as  to  have  wept ; 
on  which  it  was  observed,  "  Behold  how  he  loved  him  1"  The 
three  evangelists  agree  that  Jesus,  on  his  last  journey  to  Jeru- 
salem, passed  through  Bethany,  where  this  family,  pursuant  to 
John,  lived,  and  Matthew  and  Mark  represent  him  to  have 
been  entertained  at  Bethany  in  another  house;  but  none  of 
them  say  a  word  of  his  coming  in  contact  with  Lazarus,  upon 
whom,  according  to  John,  he  at  this  time  wrought  such  a 
miracle  as  to  have  restored  him  to  life  after  he  had  been  for 
days  in  his  grave.  Luke  does  mention  Martha  and  Mary,  and 
states  that  Jesus  was  received  in  their  house.     He  says  it  was 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


335 


situated  in  "  a  certain  village,"  without  giving  its  name.  Had 
this  been  the  well  known  village  of  Bethany,  afterwards  named 
by  him  more  than  once  (xix.  29  ;  xxiv.  50),  he  would  scarcely 
have  omitted  to  give  its  designation.  But,  in  point  of  fact,  he 
places  this  village,  it  may  be  gathered,  not  in  Judea,  but  in 
Galilee  or  Samaria.  He  has  Jesus  near  Bethsaida  (ix.  10), 
then  preparing  to  go  to  Jerusalem  by  Samaria  (ix.  51,  52), 
and  then  at  Martha's  village,  the  one  under  consideration 
(x.  38) ;  and  after  this  he  is  described  as  "journeying  toward 
Jerusalem  "  (xiii.  22),  and  then  we  learn  that  he  did  so 
"through  the  midst  of  Samaria  and  Galilee"  (xvii.  11).  In 
fact,  the  narratives  of  the  first  three  evangelists,  confining  the 
ministry  of  Jesus  to  Galilee,  give  no  opening  for  the  intimacy 
with  this  family  in  Judea  which  John  describes. 

P. — If  any  reliance  is  to  be  placed  upon  the  earlier  evan- 
gelists, the  statements  of  John,  as  to .  what  took  place  at 
Bethany,  become,  it  is  apparent,  absolutely  falsified. 

I  do  not  at  all  understand  John's  representation  of  Jesus 
joining  in  the  lamentation  at  the  death  of  Lazarus,  and  weeping. 
Jesus  had  purposely  stayed  away  to  allow  time  for  the  illness 
of  Lazarus  to  result  in  death,  and  was  just  about  to  raise  him 
up  to  life.  He  had,  in  fact,  planned  a  great  surprise  for  his 
friends  of  a  consoling  and  encouraging  nature.  To  describe 
him,  therefore,  as  weeping  with  tliem,  as  if  Lazarus  were 
absolutely  lost  to  himself  and  them,  presents  itself  to  me  as  a 
sensational  incident  in  what  has  the  appearance  of  a  concocted 
tale. 

Be  pleased  now  to  give  me  the  particulars  connected  with  The  last 
the  last  supper,  in  regard  to  the  time  of  which  you  have  men-  ^^pp®""' 
tioned  a  remarkable  disagreement  between  John  and  the  other 
evangelists. 

S. — The  difference  in  question  is  whether  the  supper  was 
the  paschal  feast,  as  represented  by  the  three  earlier  evan- 
gelists, or  an  ordinary  supper,  Jesus  being  put  to  death  before 
the  commemoration  of  the  passover,  as  is  stated  by  John. 
There  are  also  minor  differences.  That  the  evangelists  were 
all  recounting  the  same  event,  is  apparent  from  the  identity  of 
circumstances  introduced,  connected  with  the  treachery  of 
Judas,  and  Peter's  denial  of  his  master,  and  especially  from 


336 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


337 


tlieir  concurrence    in   stating  that   on  that  night   Jesus  was 
arrested  and  suffered  the  following  day. 

The  passover  was  kept  on  the  first  day  of  "  the  feast  of  un- 
leavened  bread."      On  ''the  fourteenth  day  of  the  month" 
(Nisan),   "in  the  evening,"  the  lamb  was  killed,  and   "that 
night "   eaten,   and   for   seven   days,    or    "  until   the   one  and 
twentieth  day  of  the  month,"   no  leaven  was  to  be  found  in 
the  houses  of  the  Israelites  (Exod.  xii.    6-20).     The  accounts 
of  the  last  supper  appear  in  Matthew  xxvi.  17  ;  Mark  xiv.  12  ; 
Luke  xxii.  7  ;  and  John  xiii.  1.      In  representing  the  state- 
ments of  the  first  three,  who  are  in  accord,  I  follow  those  of 
Luke.      He  says,  "  Then  came  the  day  of  unleavened   bread, 
when   the   passover  must   be  killed,"  and   that  Jesus   "sent 
Peter  and  John,  saying,  Go  and  prepare  us  the  passover,  that 
we  may  eat."     Jesus,  through  his  powers  of  prescience,  is  able 
to  indicate  to  them   that  on  entering  the  city  they  would  be 
met  by  a  man  bearing  a  pitcher  of  water,  and  they  were  to 
follow  him  into  the  house  he  might  enter,  and  would  there 
have  a  large  furnished   upper  room  placed  at  their  disposal, 
where  they  were  to  make   their   preparations.      "  And   they 
went,"  we  are  told,  "  and  found  as  he  had  said  unto  them  ; 
and  they  made  ready  the  passover."      Jesus  and  the  twelve 
apostles  accordingly  sit  down  to  the  meal,  when  he  observes, 
"With  desire  I  have  desired  to  eat  this  passover  with  you 
before  I  suffer,"  and  he  is  then  said  to  have  handed  round  to 
them  a  cup  of  wine,  and  to   have  distributed  among  them 
bread,  in  token  of  his  being  about  to  shed  his  blood  and  give 
his  body  for  them,  thus  instituting  that   most  holy  ordinance 
observed  by  the  Christians,  which  is  known  as  the  Eucharist. 
John's  account  is  devoid  of  all  these  particulars.     He  premises 
it  by  saying  that  the  time  was  "  before  the  feast  of  the  pass- 
over,"  and  passes  on  at  once  to  refer  to  "  supper  being  ended," 
without  any  details  as  to  where,  or  under  what  circumstances, 
the  supper  was  held.     Nor  has  he  a  word  about  the  institution 
of  the  Eucharist,  but  in  lieu  be  introduces  a  description  of 
Jesus  washing  the  feet  of  the  disciples  in  token  of  their  spiritual 
cleansing,  and   enjoining  this  performance  upon  his  followers, 
who,  however,  do  not  observe  the  ceremony.      In  speaking  of 
the  treachery  of  Judas,  he  further  shows  that  this  was  not  the 
paschal  feast  by  making  the  disciples  misapprehend  the  mean- 


ing of  Jesus  when  he  tells  Judas  to  do  what  he  had  to  do 
quickly,  saying  they  supposed,  as  "Judas  had  the  bag,"  that 
Jesus  had  sent  him  out  to  buy  what  they  had  "  need  of  against 
the  feast."  And  when  we  come  to  the  scene  of  the  Roman 
judgment  hall,  at  an  early  hour  the  following  morning,  he  makes 
it  still  apparent  that  the  passover  had  not  occurred,  saying  of 
the  accusing  Jews,  that  "  they  themselves  went  not  into  the 
judgment  hall,  lest  they  should  be  defiled ;  but  that  they  might 
eat  the  passover"  (xviii.  28);  and  we  have  Pilate,  consequently, 
more  than  once,  going  to  communicate  with  them  outside  the 
hall  respecting  the  trial  (xviii.  29,  38).  Finally,  as  Jesus  was 
made  over  for  execution,  it  is  stated  that  "  it  was  the  prepara- 
tion of  the  passover"  (xix.  14).  The  contradiction  between 
John  and  the  other  evangelists  is  thus  complete,  and  it  is  the 
more  marked  in  that  Luke  declares  that  John  himself  was  one 
of  the  two  sent  forward  by  Jesus  to  "  make  ready  the  pass- 
over,"  on  the  occasion  of  the  supper. 

The  other  divergencies  are,  that,  according  to  Matthew  and 
Mark,  while  they  were  occupied  eating  the  supper,  Jesus  indi- 
cated that  Judas  should  betray  him ;  that  afterwards  the 
Eucharist  was  established  ;  that  they  then  sang  a  hymn,  and 
went  out  to  the  mount  of  Olives  ;  and  that  when  there  Jesus 
foretold  that  Peter  should  deny  him  thrice  ;  while,  according 
to  Luke,  the  order  was  first  the  Eucharist ;  then  the  proclaim- 
ing the  treachery  of  Judas  ;  after  this  the  prophecy  of  Peter's 
denial ;  and  then  the  going  out  to  the  mount  of  Olives.  Luke, 
moreover,  ascribes  different  terms  to  Jesus  when  he  speaks 
of  the  treachery  of  Judas  and  the  denial  of  Peter  to  what 
the  other  evangelists  record,  and  he  introduces  matters  re- 
specting a  contention  among  the  disciples  who  should  be  the 
greatest,  the  promise  of  Jesus  that  they  should  sit  on  thrones 
judging  the  tribes  of  Israel,  the  provision  made  for  them  when 
he  had  sent  them  out  on  their  mission,  and  their  then  posses- 
sion of  two  swords,  of  all  of  which  the  earher  evangelists  say 
nothing.  The  statement  of  John  differs  throughout,  and  he  re- 
presents Jesus  as  holding  at  the  time  lengthened  discourses, 
occupying  four  chapters,  from  xiv.  to  xvii.,  of  which  the  others 
do  not  give  a  word. 

P. — How   do   the  accounts   of  the   betrayal   of  Jesus   by  The 

'  betrayal  by 

Judas  agree  ?  judas. 

y 


"■  I 


338 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


S  -As  is  usual,  Matthew  and  Mark  are  in  accord  ;  Luke 
varies  from  them   in  details  ;  and  John   gives  an  ^-^^V^^^^^^ 
and  conflicting  narrative.     Matthew  and  Mark  state  that  alter 
the  scene  of 'the  anointing,  that  is,  before   the  last  supper 
Judas   covenanted  with  the  chief  priests   for  the   price  of  his 
teachery  ;  Luke,  that  he  did  so  as   the  pa^sover  d.ew   -r 
which  agrees  in   point  of  time  ;    and  John,  that   the  design 
Intered  ^Judas'  head    only  at   the  ^f -PP^'  ^7^^;^^. 
out  to  carry  out  his  purpose.     The  place  to  which  Jesus  with 
drw  with  his  disciples  is  described  by  Matthew  and   Mark  as 
rethsemane  •   by  Luke,  as  the  mount  of  Olives  ;  and  by  John 
r^gTrden  across   the  brook   Cedron.     The  locality   though 
variously  described,  may  possibly  be  the  same.     Acc^^J-^  ^J 
Matthew  and   Mark,  Jesus  took  Peter  James,  and   John  .ith 
him   apart  from   the  rest,  and   then,  throwmg  himself  on  the 
g  "u^^^^^^^^       occupied  in  prayer.     His  '^soui;  is  said   to  have 
been  <' 'exceeding   sorrowful,  even  unto  death,"  and   his  praye 
wa^  that  he    might  escape   the  end   awaiting  him.      This    he 
TelaLl  three  times,  each  time  coming  to  the  three  disciples, 
and  speaking   to  them  reproachfully  on  finding  them  sleeping^ 
It  is  remarkable  that  these  three  were  the  -Ifed  specta^^^^^ 
at  the  transfiguration,  and  on   that  occasion  also  fell  asleep. 
His  last  address  to   these   drowsy  witnesses   betokened    con- 
fusion of  mind  on  his  own  part.      "  Sleep  on   now,    he  said 
"and    take  your  rest,"  adding   ^^^^^f^'^'y^^^^ 
going  :  behold,  he  is  at  hand   that  doth  betray  me.       Judas 
fhen  appears  with  an  armed  band,  indicates  Jesus  with  a  kiss 
and  he  is  carried  off.     Luke  represents  Jesus  having  withdrawn 
sincrly  from  the  disciples  to  the  distance  of  a  stone  s  cast,  and 
states  that,  after  offering  up  prayer  for  deliverance   once,  an 
angel  from  heaven  appeared   unto   him,  strengthening   him 
but  the  interposition  does  not  seem  to  have  been  of  any  avail, 
a^  he  then  was  "in  an  agony,"  and  "prayed  more  earnestly, 
the  sweat  falling  from  him  U>  the  ground,  "as  it  were  great 
drops  of  blood.''      He   thereupon  comes  to  the  disciples  and 
finds  them  sleeping  for  sorrow,  and  says,  "  Why  sleep  ye     rise 
and  pray,   lest  ye  enter   infx>    temptation."      And   while  he 
^peakl  Judas  comes  and  betrays   him  with  the  kiss      John 
gives  the  scene  quite  a  different  character.      Jesus  utters  no 
such  prayer  a^  the  other  evangelists  attribute  to  him.     He 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


339 


has  no  agony,  and  exhibits  no  weakness  ;  nor  is  there  scope 
for  the  kiss  of  Judas.  Jesus  boldly  confronts  the  armed  band, 
and  asks  them,  "  Whom  seek  ye  ?"  and  when  they  reply, 
"  Jesus  of  Nazareth,"  he  at  once  proclaims  himself.  On  this, 
such  is  the  power  of  his  presence,  the  party,  armed  as  they 
were,  and  bearing  lanterns  and  torches,  "  went  backward,  and 
fell  to  the  ground."  They,  however,  sufficiently  recover  them- 
selves to  bind  Jesus  and  take  him  away. 

P. — I  must  say  the  story  appears  to  me  an  incongruous 
one.  Sorrow  may  certainly  induce  sleep,  but  fear,  which  must 
also  have  been  present,  would  excite  to  wakefulness.  And 
why  did  Jesus  select  three  special  witnesses  of  his  sufferings, 
w^ho  were  to  witness  nothing,  but  were  to  drop  off  to  sleep 
repeatedly  ?  The  introduction  of  the  same  incident  of  the 
sleep  here  as  at  the  transfiguration,  where  it  was  equally  out 
of  nature,  betokens  embellishment  for  some  end  that  is  not 
very  apparent.  Possibly  the  narrators  thought  thereby  to 
depict  how  much  the  human  spectators  were  overcome  by 
scenes  beyond  their  powers  of  endurance.  Then  how  could 
these  sleeping  men  report  the  prayer  of  Jesus  ?  and  how,  in 
a  night  so  dark  as  to  call  for  the  use  of  lanterns  and  torches, 
could  the  sweat  falling  from  him  as  drops  of  blood  be  ob- 
served ?  And  then  there  is  an  angel  deputed  to  strengthen 
him,  and  yet  no  strength  is  imparted,  the  sufferer  appearing 
to  have  given  way  all  the  more. 

The  prayer  of  such  a  person  as  Jesus,  occupied  on  such  a 
work  as  his,  is,  to  my  mind,  inexplicable.  He  came  on  earth 
specially  to  die  for  sinners.  What  could  he  mean,  then,  by 
entreating  God  to  let  him  escape  this  death  ?  And  if  he 
really  wished  for  such  escape,  was  he  powerless  to  effect  it 
himself,  or  to  move  his  Father  to  work  out  his  deliverance  ? 

S. — Assuredly  it  is  not  possible  to  account  for  the  en- 
treaties for  escape  attributed  to  Jesus  by  the  earlier  evangelists. 
According  to  John,  as  I  have  already  had  occasion  to  point 
out,  the  springs  of  his  life  were  in  his  own  hands,  as  they 
would  be  were  he  a  divine  being.  "  No  man,"  he  said, 
"  taketh  it  from  me,  but  I  lay  it  down  of  myself."  Certainly, 
pursuant  to  the  earlier  evangelists,  his  was  far  from  bearing 
the  aspect  of  a  willing  sacrifice.  Nor  is  it  conceivable  that 
one  so  entirely  in  unison  with  God  should  offer  up  prayers 


#»«• 


340 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


that  were  not  to  be  attended  to.  "  I  knew,"  he  had  said 
on  another  occasion,  "  that  thou  hearest  me  always  ;"  and 
at  this  time,  when  one  of  his  disciples  used  violence  in  his 
defence,  he  showed  he  had  certain  help  at  hand.  "  Thinkest 
thou,"  he  said,  "  that  I  cannot  now  pray  to  my  Father,  and 
he  shall  presently  give  me  more  than  twelve  legions  of  angels. 
But,"  he  added,  and  the  consideration  should  have  influenced 
the  current  of  his  prayer,  "  how  then  shall  the  scriptures 
be  fulfilled,  that  thus  it  must  be"  (Matt.  xxvi.  53,  54). 

p, — Why  should  Jesus  have  bethought  him  of  the  aid  of 
legions  of  angels,  when  his  own  presence,  according  to  one 
statement,  sufficed  to  throw  his  adversaries  to  the  ground  1 
The  inconsistencies  in  these  narratives  are  such  as  can  only 
have  occurred  from  the  writers  drawing  from  the  imagination. 
John  has  formed  a  more  appropriate  conception  of  the  character 
he  had  to  design  ;  but,  after  all,  when  the  same  subject  is 
treated  in  such  very  different  styles,  what  deduction  can  be 
made  but  that  the  artists  were  not  drawing  from  a  living 
model  ?  The  kiss  of  Judas  seems  to  me  just  such  a  sen- 
sational incident  as  a  person  might  throw  in  to  give  effect 
to  a  fictitious  narrative.  As  Jesus  was  a  public  character, 
who  had  exhibited  himself  openly  to  the  people,  what  need 
was  there  for  such  a  sign  by  which  to  point  him  out  ?  Why 
also  should  Judas,  who  had  been  openly  indicated  by  Jesus 
as  a  traitor,  have  had  recourse  to  a  symbol  of  friendship 
whereby  to  approach  him  ? 

S. — There  was  certainly  no  occasion  for  any  such  sign,  the 
person  of  Jesus  being  well  known  to  those  who  had  to  arrest 
him.  "  Are  ye  come  out,"  he  said  to  them,  "  as  against  a  thief 
with  swords  and  staves  for  to  take  me  ?  I  sat  daily  with  you 
teaching  in  the  temple,  and  ye  laid  no  hold  on  me  "  (Matt, 
xxvi.  55). 

P. — What  was  the  value  given  to  Judas  for  his  offices,  and 
was  it  such  as  to  have  tempted  him  ? 

S. — The  sum  amounted  to  about  £3,  15s.  As  he  bore  the 
pubhc  bag,  out  of  which  he  was  in  the  habit  of  purloining 
(John  xii.  6),  it  was  for  his  interest  to  have  maintained  his 
connection  with  Jesus  rather  than  to  have  put  an  end  to  it. 

P. — Small  as  the  sum  was,  it  would  seem  that  Jesus  was 

^  Strauss'  New  Life  of  Jesus,  I.,  376. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


341 


sufficiently  known  to  have  made  its  expenditure  needless. 
Furthermore,  if  there  was  such  a  power  connected  with  the 
presence  of  Jesus  as  to  have  caused  the  armed  band,  when  he 
proclaimed  himself  to  them,  as  John  states,  to  recede  and  fall 
prostrate  before  him  to  the  ground,  how  are  we  to  account  for 
the  subsequent  change  of  position  when  these  same  people  lay 
hold  of  him,  bind  him,  and  carry  him  away  captive  ?  It  is 
altogether  a  representation  devoid  of  the  appearance  of  reality. 

I  gather  that  Jesus  sought  to  avoid  publicity,  but  with  what  Jesus 
motive,  consistently  with  his  calling  and  mission,  it  is  difficult  publicity. 
to  understand. 

S. — His  conduct  certainly  is  not  properly  explicable.      The 
aspect  he  had  to  maintain  was  that  of  the  Messiah, 'and  the 
deliverance  he  was  to  effect  was  to  be  through  his  own  death. 
Naturally,  he  should  have  courted  observation,  nor  should  he 
have  exhibited  any  apprehension  of  the  fate  to  which  he  had 
devoted  himself.      But  we  find  him,  as  we  have  seen  in  the 
examination  of  the  miracles,  constantly  suppressing  the  revela- 
tion that  he  was  the  Christ  when  the  discovery  was  made  that 
he  was  such,  either  by  men  or  demons.     And  there  is  room  to 
connect  this  suppression  with  the  fear  of  death.      On  Peter 
proclaiming  him  to  be  ''the  Christ,  the  son  of  the  living  God," 
''  then  charged   he  his  disciples  that  they  should  tell  no  man 
that  he  was  Jesus  the  Christ ; "  immediately  after  which  we 
are  informed,   "From  that  time  forth  began  Jesus   to  show 
unto  his  disciples  how  that  he  must  go  unto  Jerusalem,  and 
suffer  many  things  of  the  elders,  and  chief  priests,  and  scribes, 
and  be  killed,  and  be  raised  again  the  third  day."     With  this 
theme  he  was  occupied  too  frequently  for  the  mere  purpose  of 
a    revelation    (Matt.  xvii.  22,  23;  xx.  18,  19;    xxvi.  2,  31). 
It  was  a  matter  evidently  weighing  upon  his  own  mind,  and 
the  degree  to  which  it  oppressed  him  is  depicted  in  the  garden 
of  Gethsemane.      Nor  was  the  method  of  his  mission  such  as 
belonged  properly  to  the  Messiah.      He  is  reserved  in  total 
obscurity   during   his    early   years   until   matured   for   action. 
John  was  his  precursor,  to  proclaim  his  advent,  and  to  prepare 
the   way   before   him.     Directly   John  was   put  aside,   Jesus 
came  upon  the  scene.     He  had  then  to  exhibit  himself  to  the 
Jews  as  their  expected  Messiah,  the  corner  stone  which  the 
builders  had  to  reject  at  their  peril.     Judea,  and  prominently 


342 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


Jerusalem,  was  his  appropriate  field.     John,  m  improvement 
upon  the  earlier  histories,  places  him  chiefly  there  ;  but  the 
first  three  historians  remove  him  at  once  to  Galilee,  and  keep 
him  there  till  just  a  few  days  before  he  was  to  suffer,  wheu 
they  present  him,  for  the  first  time,  in  ministry  at  Jerusalem 
His  testimony,  according  to  them,  is  offered,  prommently,  not 
to  the  Jews  whom  it  concerned  so  much,  but  to  the  mixed 
barbaric  race  in  Galilee.     The  choice  of  this  field,  there  is 
room   to  say,  may  have  arisen  from  personal  apprehensions. 
Jesus  goes  thither  directly  he  hears  of  John's  incarceration 
(Matt.  iv.  12),  as  if  to  avoid  a  similar  fate;   and  when   he 
learns  that  John  has  been  put  to  death,  he  withdraws  further 
"into  a  desert  place  apart"  (Matt.  xiv.  13).     The  evangelist 
John  certainly  so  accounts  for  his  operating  m  Galilee,  repre- 
senting his  brethren  as  roundly  taxing  him  with  skulking  and 
avoiding  the  proper  quarter  in  which  be  should  show  himself 
«  After  these  things,"  he  says,  "  Jesus  walked  m  Galilee  :  tor 
he  would  not  walk  in  Jewry,  because  the  Jews  sought  to  kill 
him      Now  the  Jews'  feast  of  tabernacles  was  at  baud.      His 
brethren  therefore  said  unto  him.  Depart  hence,  and  go  into 
Judea,  that  thy  disciples  also  may  see  the  works  that  thou 
doest      For  there   is  no  man  that  doeth  anything  in  secret, 
and  he  himself  seeketh  to  be  known   openly.     If  thou  do 
these  things,  show  thyself  to  the  world."     And  then  we  are 
told  that  Jesus,  after  saying,  "I  go  not  up  yet  unto  this  least, 
"  when  his  brethren  were  gone  up,  then  went  he  also  up  unto 
the  feast,  not  openly,  but  as  it  were  in  secret"  (John  vu.  1-10). 
And  thus  John  transfers  him  to  Judea,  for  the  ensuing  six 
months    till   his    death,    against    the   representations   of   the 
earlier  evangehsts  that  he  remained  all  this  while  in  Galilee. 
But  another,  and  a  more  probable  solution,  is  that  Galilee  was 
the    scene    of    his    labours    simply    because    there    was    his 
family    abode.      When    he    meets    with    John    it    is    to    be 
baptized    by   him.      This    particular    purpose    brought    him 
from  Galilee  to  Judea  (Matt.  iii.  1 3),  and  his  object  being 
effected,  he  returned  to  Galilee  without  even  visiting  Jerusa- 
lem.    And  when  he  makes  his  final  journey  to  Jerusalem,  it 
is  to  attend   the   passover  as   others  might  do.     This  is  the 
foundation   on   which   the   earlier   evangelists   worked.      The 
fourth   evangelist,  seeing  how  inappropriate  it  was  that  the 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


343 


mission  of  the  Messiah  should  be  cast  in  Galilee,  boldly  trans- 
fers him  to  Judea.  He  takes  this  liberty  in  keeping  with  the 
whole  scheme  and  tenor  of  his  gospel,  in  which  he  seeks  to 
exalt  the  subject  of  his  narrative  in  action,  feeling,  and  doc- 
trine, as  the  God-man  and  the  Messiah,  unrestrained  by  the 
particulars  given  of  him  in  the  earlier  histories.  Matthew  and 
Mark,  as  we  have  seen,  keep  closely  together,  Luke  follows 
their  method  but  is  divergent  in  details,  and  John,  with  settled 
aim,  puts  forward  an  independent  statement,  which  brings  him, 
at  nearly  every  turn,  into  absolute  conflict  with  the  others. 

p The  history,  assuredly,  does  not  improve  upon  acquaint- 
ance" as  to  its  title  to  reality.    What  is  the  next  passage  in  it  ? 

S.— That  of  the  judgment.  The  accounts  are  to  be  found  The  ^ 
at  Matthew  xxvi.  57,  Mark  xiv.  53,  Luke  xxii.  54,  and  John 
xviii  12.  Jesus,  when  arrested,  was  taken  to  the  palace  ot 
the  high  priest,  brought  before  the  Jewish  council  or  Sanhe- 
drim and  examined,  and  then  taken  before  the  Roman  gover- 
nor Pontius  Pilate  with  whom  lay  the  power  of  passing  sentence 
of  death  when  he  was  condemned  and  led  out  for  execution. 

The  arrest  was  made  at  night,  and  the  crucifixion  occurred 
the  following  morning,  the  judgment  scene  taking  place  in  the 
interval.  According  to  Mark  (xv.  25),  it  was  at  the  third 
hour  or  9  a.m.,  that  Jesus  was  crucified.  Allowing  for  his 
removal  and  being  fixed  upon  the  cross,  the  condemnation  must 
have  been  effected  by  so  early  an  hour  as  about  eight  in  the 
morning.  John,  however,  represents  it  to  have  been  at  about 
the  sixth  hour,  or  twelve  o'clock,  that  Pilate  gave  Jesus  up  to 
suffe  the  sentence  passed  upon  him  (xix.  14).  Matthew  and 
Luke  do  not  say  when  the  crucifixion  took  place  but  they  side 
with  Mark  so  I  as  to  show  that  by  the  -th  hour  Jesus  h^ 
been  for  some  time  on  the  cross  (Matt,  xxvii.  4o  ;  Luke  xxiu. 

**jolin  has  it  that  Jesus  was  led  first  to  Annas  the  father-in-law 
of  the  hi-h-priest  Caiaphas,  and  afterwards  to  Caiaphas  ;  the 
othe  ,  t'at  he  was  taken  direct  to  Caiaphas.  Matthew  repre- 
sents he  Sanhedrim  to  be  sitting  on  the  arrival  of  Jesus.  He 
1  "  and  they  that  had  laid  hold  on  Jesus  ed  h,m  away  to 
Saphas  the  high  pries,  where  the  scribes  and  t^e  ekie- we- 
assembled.  But  Peter  followed  him  afar  off  Mark  makes  a 
SmTar  sUtement,  saying,  "  And  they  led  Jesus  away  to  the  high 


344 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


priest :  and  with  him  were  assembled  all  the  chief  priests  and  the 
elders  and  the  scribes.  And  Peter  followed  him  afar  off."  The 
improbability  is  great  that  the  assembly  were  sitting  at  the 
time  in  question,  which  was  night.  Luke  has  a  better  version. 
He  says  that  Jesus  was  taken  to  the  hall  of  the  high  priest's 
palace,  and  that  "  as  soon  as  it  was  day,  the  elders  of  the  people 
and  the  chief  priests  and  the  scribes  came  together,  and  led 
him  into  their  council."  John  represents  Jesus  as  before 
Caiaphas  singly,  without  any  mention  of  the  Sanhedrim.  In 
fact  he  excludes  the  trial  before  this  body,  making  Pilate  pro- 
pose that  the  case,  unsuitable  for  himself,  should  be  laid  before 
them.  "  Take  ye  him,"  he  said,  "  and  judge  him  according 
to  your  law  ;"  to  which  they  objected,  as  they  had  no  power  to 
pass  the  sentence  of  death  they  were  bent  upon  securing. 

Peter's  denial  of  Jesus  occurred  after  the  arrival  of  the  party 
at  the  palace  of  Caiaphas.  It  was  in  fulfilment  of  a  prediction 
by  Jesus  which  has  been  variously  given.  John,  as  we  have 
seen,  says  this  prediction  was  made  while  Jesus  and  his  disci- 
ples were  holding  their  last  supper,  and  the  others  not  until 
they  had  withdrawn  to  Gethsemane  after  the  supper  was  over. 
Matthew  and  Mark  represent  that  Jesus  declared  that  all  would 
be  offended  because  of  him  that  night,  meaning  that  all  would 
disown  him,  and  that  on  Peter  protesting  that  he  could  never 
behave  in  such  a  manner,  the  prophecy  of  his  falling  away  was 
made.  Luke  does  not  lead  up  to  the  prophecy  in  this  manner, 
but  says  that  Jesus  entered  upon  the  subject  direct  with  Peter, 
saying  that  Satan  had  desired  to  have  him  and  sift  him  as 
wheat,  on  which  Peter  put  in  his  protestation.  John  has 
altooether  a  different  introduction  of  the  matter.  Jesus, 
according  to  him,  was  speaking  of  being  glorified,  and  of  his 
approaching  departure  from  them,  whereupon  Peter  declared 
he  would  follow  him  any  where  and  lay  down  his  life  for  him, 
and  then  the  prophecy  which  is  in  question  was  uttered.  Pur- 
suant to  Matthew,  Luke,  and  John,  the  cock  was  not  to  crow 
till  Peter  had  denied  Jesus  three  times,  but  pursuant  to  Mark 
the  terms  were  that  the  cock  should  not  crow  twice  until  he 
had  denied  him  thrice.  The  narrators  give  the  event  in  cor- 
respondence with  their  several  versions  of  the  prophecy  ;  that 
is,  according  to  the  three  who  are  in  agreement,  Peter  denies 
aU  knowledge  of  Jesus  three  several  times,  and  then  the  cock 


li 


t 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


345 


crows,  and  according  to  Mark  the  cock  crew  after  the  first 
denial,  and  again    *'  the  second  time "   after  the   third  ;  the 
whole  being  a  remarkable  exemplification,  as  in  the  instances 
of    the   "ass"  and    the   "vesture,"  of   how    prophecies    and 
events  are  shaped  to  be  in  accord.     Matthew  and  Mark  have 
it  that   the   first  denial  was   made  while  Peter  was  in   the 
palace,  and  that  he  then  went  "  out  into  the  porch"  where  the 
second  and  third  took  place  ;  but  according  to  Luke  and  John 
the  whole  occurred  in  the  same  place  where  Peter  first  was. 
Luke,  who  it  will  be  remembered  has  all  the  party  at  this  time 
together  waiting  in  the  hall  for  the  assemblage  of  the  Sanhe- 
drim, makes  Jesus,  as  the  cock  crew,  turn  and  look  upon  Peter, 
who   thereon   goes   out   and  weeps  bitterly,   an  incident  not 
appearing  in  the  narratives  of  Matthew  and   Mark,  and   not 
possible  to  be  introduced  therein,  seeing  that  with  them  Jesus 
was  then  before  the  Sanhedrim,  and  Peter,  elsewhere,  with  the 
servants.      Matthew  furthermore  represents  that  when  Peter 
made  his  third  denial,  he  enforced  his  protestation  by  beginning 
-  to  curse  and  to  swear,"  a  strange  feature  in   one  to  whom 
"  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven"   (xvi.  19)  had  shortly 
before  been  committed.     Consistently  with  the  course  of  their 
respective  narratives,  Matthew  and  Mark  recount  what  took 
place  with  Jesus  before  the  Sanhedrim,  and  then  introduce  the 
denials  of  Peter;  whereas  Luke  places  the  denials  first,  while  all 
were  waiting  in  the  hall  for  the  assembling  of  the  Sanhedrim 
Matthew  and  Mark,  having  the  Sanhedrim  seated  m  the  dead 
of  night,  represent  them  as  occupied,  at  this  hour,  m  seeking 
for  false  evidence  against  Jesus,  and  one  point  they  strove  to  prove 
affainst  him  was  whether  he  had  said  that  he  would  destroy  the 
temple  and  rebuild  it  in  three  days,  on  which,  however,  they 
could  not  get  their  witnesses  to  agree.      The  other  evangehsts 
sav  nothing  of  this  search  for  evidence,  and  the    statement 
that  an  august  assembly  were  so  engaged,  without  disguise,  is 
surely  of  an  improbable  nature.      The  speech  was  one  which 
Jesus  had  actually  made,  so  that  false  evidence  for  it  was  not 
necessary;   and  whether  such  words  had  been  uttered  or  not 
could  in  no  way  have  influenced  the  issue  of  the  trial.      The 
account    concludes   with    another    improbable    representation, 
namely,  that  these  reverend  seniors  amused  themselves    after 
The  close  of  the  examination,  with  spitting  upon  and  buffeting 


I 


346 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


the  accused.     Luke  more  consistently  attributes  this  conduct 
to  the  ''  men  that  held  Jesus,"  and  says  it  occurred  before  the 

Sanhedrim  met. 

Jesus  is  then  taken  to  the  tribunal  of  Pilate  where  he  is 
finally  condemned.  Luke,  however,  has  it  that  Pilate,  finding 
that  Jesus  was  a  Galilean,  sends  him  to  Herod,  to  whose  juris- 
diction he  belonged,  and  who  happened  then  to  be  at  Jerusalem, 
and  that  Herod,  not  being  able  to  make  anything  of  him,  re- 
transmits him  to  Pilate,  who  concludes  the  trial.  This  recourse 
to  Herod  is  excluded  by  the  narratives  of  the  other  evangelists, 
who  have  Jesus  continuously  before  Pilate  from  the  time  that 
he  is  brought  to  him.  According  to  Matthew,  Mark,  and  John, 
Pilate's  soldiers  robe  and  crown  Jesus  and  ill-use  him ;  but 
according  to  Luke  it  was  Herod's  people  who  treated  him  thus. 
Matthew  says  the  robe  was  a  scarlet  one,  and  Mark  and  John 
that  it  was  purple.      Luke  does  not  describe  the  colour. 

The  accounts  differ  as  to  what  exactly  passed  at  this  trial, 
that  of  John  being  considerably  in  excess  as  to  matter  over 
those  of  the  other  evangelists.     Nothing  is  even  alleged  against 
the  accused  to  bring  him  under  the  power  of  the  law,  and  the 
judge  finds  him  innocent  of  all  offence.      And  yet,  while  pro- 
claiming this  innocence,  he  is  made  to  acquiesce  in  consigning 
the   accused  to  death.      The  whole  character  of  the  trial,  so 
called,  is  devoid  of  substantiahty,  and  therefore  sins  against 
probabiUty;     and     it    is    inconceivable     that,    under    a    well 
ordered  judicature,  such  as  that  of  Rome,  the  unseemly,  inane, 
proceedings  described,  could  have  had   place.      Pilate  is  even 
made,  when  condemning  an  innocent  man,  to  wash  his  hands 
in  token  of  his  own  innocence,  a  formula,  moreover,  of  Jewish 
ordinance  (Deut.  xxi.  6,  7),  which  a  Roman  would  not  have 
resorted  to.    Nor  is  it  credible  that  these  proceedings,  consisting, 
according  to  Luke,   of  three  examinations,  held  before  three 
separate  tribunals,  could  have  been  brought  to  a  close,  and  an 
unanimous  condemnation  to  death,  without  evidence  of  guilt, 
have  been  secured,  by  so  early  an  hour  as  about  eight  o'clock 
in  the  morning,  as  is  to  be  gathered  from  the  statement  of  Mark. 
P.  I  must  say  these  narratives  are  consistent  in  their  incon- 
sistencies.     Throughout  they  betray  their  want  of  basis  upon 
realities.    The  concluding  scenes  are,  I  presume,  the  death  and 
the  resurrection. 


I* 


' 


f 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


347 


S    They  are.     The  crucifixion  is  given  at  Matthev  xxvn.  32,  ^«i^„„_ 
Mark  XV.  21,  Luke  xxiii.  26,  and  John  xix.  17.     The  accounts 
agree  as  to  the  main  fact,  but  differ  throughout  the  details. 

According  to  the  three  earlier  evangelists,  as  the  party  were 
taking  Jesus  to  the  place  of  execution,  they  fell  in  with  one 
Simon  of  Cyrene,  "  who  passed  by,  coming  out  of  the  country, 
and  they  compelled  him  to  bear  the  cross.  John,  with  more 
adaptation  to  the  doctrine  of  Jesus,  where  he  said,  "  If  any  man 
will  come  after  me,  let  him  deny  himself,  and  take  up  his  cross 
and  follow  me"  (Matt.  xvi.  24),  represents  Jesus  as  himselt 

bearing  his  cross.  .     ,    ,. 

Luke  says  that  a  great  concourse  of  people,  including  women, 
accompanied  him,  bewailing  and  lamenting  him,  and  that  Jesus, 
turned  round  and  told  them  not  to  weep  for  him,  but  for  them- 
selves and  for  their  children,  for  the  greater  calamities  that 
were  to  come  upon  them.     The  other  evangelists  do  not  men- 

tion  this  incident.  ,     i  ^i       ^  ^^ 

The  earlier  evangelists  say  that  when  they  reached  the  place 
where  he  was  to  suffer,  the  executioners  offered  Jesus  some^ 
thing  to  drink.  Matthew  says  it  was  vinegar  mingled  with 
gall  Mark  wine  mingled  with  myrrh ;  and  Luke,  simply  vinegar. 
'  Luke  t  it  that  ^hen  crucified  Jesus  -kedjor  forgiveness 
for  his  executioners,  but  this  is  Bot  mentioned  by  the  other. 

Then  we  have  John  saying  that  the  J  vesture    alone  wa 
ca^t  lots  for,  the  rest  of  the  "  garments"  being  made  up  in  four 
pSs'tl  every  soldier  a  part."  while  the  other  evangelists  re- 
J  etnt  That  the  whole  were  cast  lots  for,  wit^^out  d— ^ 
•        A  label  or  "accusation,"  was  set  upon  the  cross,  but  tact 
evangett  while  professing  to  give  tlie  very  words  of  _  t^ie  in- 
scripLn,  describes  it  differently.  J^  ;TTt  ^ng  of  th^ 
Tp^us   the  King  of  the  Jews;      another,      ine  ivi  ^ 
Jews;-      he  thfrd,  "  This  is  the  King  of  the  Jews  ;     and  the 
fourth   "  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  the  King  of  the  Jews. 
^"tS'agrtthat  two  others  ^^f  ^J^^^r^.^?  t  r  J^I^ 
gelists  as  ^^l^^-^^^l^^^^X^Zr:^^^^^^  said  to  have 


i 


\\ 


ii 


348 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


exclaimed,  "  Lord,  remember  me  when  thou  comest  into  thy 
kingdom;"  to  which  Jesus  repHed,  "To-day  shalt  thou  be 
with  me  in  paradise."  This  remarkable  manifestation  escapes 
the  notice  of  the  other  evangelists,  and  John  (xx.  17)  negatives 
the  declaration  attributed  to  Jesus  that  he  was  to  be  that  day 
transferred  to  paradise,  by  making  him  say,  three  days  subse- 
quently, when  in  his  resurrection  state,  that  he  had  "  not  yet 
ascended  to  his  Father."  If  what  John  says  can  be  accepted, 
then  Luke  has  been  guilty  of  embellishment. 

Darkness  is  then  said  to  have  come  ''over  the  whole  land" 
from  the  sixth  to  the  ninth  hour.      It  was  "  about  the  sixth 
hour,''  according  to  John,  that  Pilate,  in  the  judgment  scene, 
presented  Jesus  to  the  Jews,  saying,  "  Behold  your  king,"  after 
which  the  removal  to  the  place  of  execution,  and  the  execution 
itself,  had  to  take  place ;    so  that  with  this  given  precision  of 
time,  John's  narrative  excludes  the  preternatural  darkness  al- 
leged by  the  other  evangelists.      John,  in  fact,  in  his  account 
of  the  crucifixion,  mentions  no  such  phenomenon,  and  he  de- 
scribes a  communication  as  occurring  at  the  foot  of  the  cross 
which  also  excludes  the  darkness.      The  mother  of  Jesus,  with 
Mary  the  wife  of  Cleophas,  and  Mary  Magdalene,  as  also  the 
disciple  whom  he  specially  loved,  and  who  is  understood  to  be 
John  himself,  are  stated  by  John  to  have  "  stood  by  the  cross," 
and   Jesus,    observing   them,    commits  his  mother   and  John 
to   each    other.       None   of  the    other   evangelists   notice   the 
presence  of  the  mother  of  Jesus,  or  the  occurrence   of  such 
an  incident,  and  Matthew  and  Mark  say,  after  bringing  their 
narratives  down  to  the  death  of  Jesus,  that  "  many  women  were 
there  beholding  afar  off,"  among  whom  they  particularize  one 
of  the  said  females,  namely,  Mary  Magdalene  ;  so  that  here,  if 
they  are  accurate,  John  must  have  indulged  in  scene  painting. 
it  is  at  the  ninth  hour,  according  to  the  earlier  evangelists, 
that  Jesus  expired,  and  all  agree  that  ere  he  breathed  his  last 
he  uttered  an  exclamation.      Matthew  and  Mark  have  it  that 
it  was  the  despairing  cry,  "  My  God,  my  God,  why  hast  thou 
forsaken  me  ? "     Luke  attributes  to  him  the  very  different  and 
more  appropriate  sentiment,  "  Father,  into  thy  hands  I  com- 
mend my  spirit.'*     And  John  states  that  he  merely  uttered, 
"  It  is  finished." 

At  this  time,  pursuant  to  Matthew,  Mark,  and  John,  a  spunge 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


849 


\ 


' 


dipped  in  vinegar  was  offered  to  him.     Mattliew  and  Mark  say 
this  was  placed  on  a  reed,  John  upon  hyssop. 

As  Jesus  gave  up  the  ghost,  the  earlier  evangelists  state  that 
the  veil  of  the  temple  was  rent  in  twain,  a  phenomenon,  the 
signification  of  which  would  seem  to  be  that  the  Jewish  dis- 
pensation was  at  an  end,  the  holy  of  holies,  screened  from 
public  view  by  the  veil,  being  now  thrown  open  to  all.     John 
has  no  notice  of  this  significant  and  marvellous  demonstration. 
Matthew  adds  a  succession  of  wonders  that  are  not  reported  by 
any  of  the  other  evangelists.     He  says,  "  The  earth  did  quake, 
and  the  rocks  rent ;  and  the  graves  were  opened  ;  and  many 
bodies  of  the  saints  which  slept  arose,  and  came  out  of  the 
graves  after  his  resurrection,  and  went  into  the  holy  city,  and 

appeared  unto  many."  . 

According  to  Matthew  and  Mark  the  centurion,  who  was  on 
duty  on  the  occasion,  as  Jesus  expired,  acknowledged  him  to 
be  the  Son  of  God.  Matthew  says  it  was  the  earthquake  aiid 
the  attendant  wonders  which  drew  from  him  this  acYowledg- 
ment;  Mark,  that  the  loud  cry  of  Jesus,  as  he  died,  led  thereto 
Luke  has  it  that  the  centurion's  recognition  was  simply  to 
Jesus  being  a  righteous  man.     John  says  nothmg  of  this. 

The  ear^  evangelists  represent  that  many  women  attended 
the  execution,  and  that  they  had  followed  Jesus  from  Galilee. 
This  corresponds  with  their  declaration  that  he  was  just  from 
S  lee  whfch  had  been  the  field  of  his  labours.  John,  who 
Ses  J^dea  the  scene  of  his  ministry,  has  nothing  as  to  this 

^°^  jlh^states  that  as  the  approaching  sabbath  was  a  high 
dav  and  it  was  an  object  that  the  bodies  of  those  executed 
id  not  be  kept  hanging  upon  it,  tbe  Jews  ob  ained  an 
tZr  to  have  the  legs  of  the  victims  ^^f^Z^^^Z 
miETht  be  put  an  end  to  and  removed,  and  that  Jesus  being 
found  already  dead,  one  of  the  soldiers  pierced  bis  side  wi  h  a 
iTar  fn  itu  of  thus  mutilating  him.  The  other  evangelis^ 
spear,  i^  "^u  circumstance,  and   Mark  makes 

say  nothmg  of  this  ^otf^^  ^  ^hat  when  permis- 

a  statement  inconsistent  there^ik^^^^^  J  H^^  ^^ 

sion  was  asked  of  Herod  th^J-- J^  ^^       ^^  ,,,,  fo,  „,e 
then  >?---*J2  \ti  on  the  subject ;  whereas,  if  he  had 


350 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


news  of  his  death  could  have  caused  him  no  such  doubt  or 

surprise. 

All  accounts  agree  that  Joseph  of  Arimathsea  begged  the 
body  of  Pilate,  and  laid  it  in  a  tomb.      Mark  says  that  he 
"  went  in  boldly  unto  Pilate,  and  craved  the  body  of  Jesus  ;" 
John,  that  he  did   so  ''  secretly  for  fear  of  the  Jews."      The 
earlier  evangelists  say  that  he  simply  wrapped  it  in  a  clean 
linen  cloth,  and  then  closed  the  sepulchre  with  a  stone.     John 
has  it  that  he  was  accompanied  by  Nicodemus,  who  brought 
about  an  hundred  weight  of  myrrh  and  aloes,  and  winding  the 
body  ''in  linen  clothes  with  the  spices,"  embalmed  it  m  the 
manner  usual  with  the  Jews.      Luke  is  distinct  that  there  was 
no  such  embalming.      He  says  that  Mary  Magdalene  and  other 
women  followed  the  body,  and  "  beheld  the  sepulchre,  and  how 
his  body  was  laid,"  after  which  they  "  returned  and  prepared 
spices  and  ointments,"  which  of  course  they  would  not  have 
done  had  the  embalming  been  already  undertaken.      He  says 
that  on  the  Sunday  following,  this  being  the  Friday,  the  women 
came  accordingly  with  the  spices,  and  in  this  he  is  supported 
by  Mark.      Matthew  says  that  the  sepulchre  was  a  new  one, 
which  Joseph  had  hewn  for  himself.     The  tomb  is  one  hitherto 
never  used,  as  the  ass  on  which  Jesus  rode  into  Jerusalem  was 
one   "whereon  never  man  sat."     It  was  just  so  in  respect  of 
the  removal  of  the  ark  in  the  time  of  David.      It  was  placed 
on  a  "  new  cart,"  drawn  by  "  two  milch  kine,  on  which  there 
hath  come  no  yoke  "  (1  Sam.  vi.  7).     These  features  are  ob- 
viously to  enhance  the  importance  of  the  personage  or  object 
treated   of.      The  other  evangelists  do  not  say  to  whom  the 
tomb  belonged,  and  John  leaves  it  to  be  inferred  that  it  was 
selected  simply  because  near  at  hand.      Matthew  has  it  that 
the  day  following  the  burial,  the  chief  priests  and  pharisees 
went   to  Pilate  and  obtained  from  him  permission  to  set  a 
watch  on  the  sepulchre,  lest  the  disciples  might  remove  the 
body,  and  then  represent  that  Jesus  had  risen  from  the  dead, 
in  fulfilment  of  his  prediction  that  "after  three  days  I  will  rise 
ao-ain  ;"  a  precaution  which  was  thereupon  taken.     The  other 
evangelists  do  not  record  this  circumstance. 

p The  crucifixion  was  an  event  that  would  arrest  atten- 
tion in  a  very  decided  way.  The  discrepancies  you  have 
pointed  out   in  these   statements   can  scarcely  be  accounted 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


351 


for    but    by    the    conclusion    that    the    narrators    were    not 
eye  witnesses  of  the  scene,  or  that  such  a  thing  as  they  de- 
scribe had  no  real  occurrence.     For  example,  persons  actually 
present  on  such  an  occasion  could  not  have  mistaken  the  label  of 
accusation  so  as  each  to  report  it  in  a  different  manner  ;  they 
would  surely  have  concurred  in  noticing  the  very  remarkable 
confession  of  faith  of  the  dying  thief,  and  the  gracious  assur- 
ance he  received  at  the  time  from  their  divine  master.      One 
who  had  the  full  persuasion  that  that  very  day  his  soul  was  to 
be  translated  to  paradise,  and  who,  as  he  expired,  could  resign 
his  spirit  with  confidence  into  the  hands  of  his  heavenly  father, 
could  not  also,  at  this  very  time,  have  been  overtaken  by  a 
sense  of  utter  abandonment  by  God  ;  still  less  could  a  divine 
personage,  knowing  he  was  from  God,  and  was  returning  to 
God,  have  been  overcome  by  so  debasing  and  so  untrue  a  senti- 
ment.    Narrators,  if  spectators,  would  not  have  overlooked  the 
very  interesting  communication  made  by  Jesus  to  his  mother 
and  favourite   disciple  at  the  foot  of  the  cross,  and,  on  the 
contrary,  have  reported  those  so  spoken  to  as  standing  too  far 
off  to  be'  addressed.    If  the  death  of  Jesus  had  produced  a  con- 
vulsion of  the  earth,  a  rending  of  rocks,  and  the  resurrection  of 
many  holy  persons  from  their  graves,  not  one  of  them  would 
have  failed   to  record  such  wondrous  demonstrations  of  the 
truth  of  their  master's  mission  ;  nor  could  they  have  failed  to 
notice  the  piercing  of  his  side,  or  fallen  into  such  error  a.s  has 
arisen  respecting  the  embalming  of  his  body. 

This  execution,  as  reported,  is  a  very  remarkable  one.  It 
was  that  of  a  godly  man,  pronounced  innocent  by  his  judge, 
and  yet  given  up  to  the  senseless  malice  of  his  enemies,  who 
had  such  influence  as  to  commit  the  ruler  to  this  desecration 
of  his  office.      Is  there  any  support  for  the  event  from  contem- 

T!!-TherfarL  writers  of  that  and  of  closely  succeeding  mston^a 
times,  in  whose  pages  such  an  event  should  have  had  place, 
had  ii  really  occurred.  Mr  Cooper,  in  his  lectures,  enumerates 
thirty,  others  than  Christians,  who  lived  from  A.D.  40  to  A.D. 
176  I  will  particularly  instance  Philo,  a  devout  Jew,  o  t^e 
time  ascribed  to  Jesus,  who  wa.  much  ^^-P^^ -^^\^;^^^^^^^^^ 
Uterature  and  the  interests  of  his  people  He  ha.  not  a  word 
on  the  subject,  and  in  fact  ha.  no  note  of  Jesus  or  his  foUowers. 


352 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


353 


Pheno- 
mena at 
death  of 
Jesus. 


Among  the  others  there  are  two,  namely  Josephus  who  lived 
A.D.  40,  and  Tacitus  who  was  of  A.D.  110,  in  whose  writings 
passages  speaking  of  the  execution  of  Jesus  appear.  In  that 
in  Josephus  his  resurrection  is  also  mentioned.  Critics,  however, 
see  grounds  for  rejecting  both  as  forged  interpolations.  Josephus 
was  a  Jew,  and  ever  remained  such,  and  yet  in  the  passage  in 
question  is  made  to  acknowledge  that  Jesus  was  the  Messiah. 
The  passage  in  Tacitus,  had  it  been  genuine,  would  not  have 
been  overlooked  by  all  the  early  Christian  writers  in  their 
various  disputations  with  objectors,  and  especially  by  Tertullian, 
who  quoted  largely  from  his  works,  and  the  ecclesiastical  his- 
torian Eusebius,  who  was  zealous  in  his  defence  of  the  faith 
and  greedy  of  materials  with  which  to  support  it.^ 

p, It  is  suspicious,  certainly,  that  the  condemnation  of  Jesus 

by  the  Roman  authority  should  be  at  once  of  so  improbable  a 
character,  and  destitute  of  support  from  independent  sources, 
except  in  two  passages  which  may  be  condemned  as  fabricated. 
Who  were  the  saints  of  whom  Matthew  speaks  as  having 
risen  from  their  graves  ?  To  whom  did  they  appear  ?  And 
how  was  it  that  their  graves  were  opened  as  Jesus  died,  while 
their  bodies  did  not  come  out  till  after  his  resurrection  ?  What 
also  became  of  them  afterwards? 

S. I  am  unable  to  give  you  any  information  on  this  subject. 

Their  not  appearing  till  after  Jesus  rose  from  death  would 
seem  to  have  been  introduced  so  as  not  to  give  them  the  pre- 
cedence over  him  in  the  exercise  of  the  privilege  of  resurrection. 
He  is  said  to  be  "  the  first  that  should  rise  from  the  dead  " 
(Acts  xxvi.  23)  ;  "  the  firstfruits  of  them  that  slept "  (1  Cor. 
XV.  20)  ;  "the  firstborn  from  the  dead"  (Col.  i.  18). 

p.-^The  statement  seems  to  me  a  very  clumsy  one.  To 
mark  and  enhance  the  death  of  the  Messiah,  nature  is  said  to 
be  convulsed,  and  these  graves  thrown  open,  but  the  exit  of  the 
saints  who  were  to  come  out  of  them  is  restrained  till  he  should 
first  have  made  his  egress  from  his  tomb  three  days  later.  And, 
after  all,  he  had  no  such  precedence  in  resurrection,  for  several 
persons  are  said  to  have  been  raised  from  the  dead  by  the  pro- 
phets of  old  and  by  himself,  two  passed  into  heaven  without 
ever   being  in  their  graves,  and  one  of  these,  namely  Elias 

1  R.  Cooper's  Lectures  on  the  Bible,  51-54,  58-61. 


1 


■  i 

1  s 

kBod 

I  kn 

init 


appeared  to  him  with  Moses  in  risen  life  at  the  time  of  his 
transfiguration. 

Are  the  disturbances  of  nature  which  are  said  to  have 
occurred  at  the  crucifixion,  namely  the  preternatural  darkness 
for  three  hours,  and  the  earthquake,  mentioned  by  historians 
of  the  time  ? 

S,   They  are  not.    Two  of  the  writers  of  that  period,  namely 
the  elder  Pliny  and   Seneca,  who  both  lived  in   A.D.  79,  left 
works  "  recording  all  the  great  phenomena  of  nature,  earth- 
quakes,  comets,   ecHpses,"   &c.,    and    yet    mention    "  nothing 
I        applicable  to  the  narrative  of  Matthew."^ 

F.  That  seems  to  demonstrate  that  nothing  of  the  kind 
could  really  have  occurred.  Moreover,  had  there  been  such 
phenomena,  the  other  evangelists  would  not  have  failed  to 
support  their  representations  with  these  divine  manifestations. 

Let  us  pass  to  the  next  and  concluding  event,  that  of  the  The  resur- 
resurrection.      I  understand  this  fact  to  be  the  support  of  the  ''®*^^'®"' 
crowning  doctrine  of  the  Christians,  on  which  their  hopes  of 
eternal  happiness  absolutely  depend. 

S.  It  is  so.  The  idea  is  that  without  the  sacrifice  of  the 
Messiah  all  would  perish,  and  that  by  participation  in  his 
resurrection  life  they  get  that  new  life  which  is  free  of  sin  and  its 
penal  consequences.  *'  If  Christ  be  not  risen,"  says  Paul,  *'  then 
is  our  preaching  vain,  and  your  faith  is  also  vain.  Yea,  and 
we  are  found  false  witnesses  of  God ;  because  we  have  testified 
of  God  that  he  raised  up  Christ. — And  if  Christ  be  not  raised, 
your  faith  is  vain;  ye  are  yet  in  your  sins.  Then  they  also 
which  are  fallen  asleep  in  Christ  are  perished  "  (1  Cor.  xv.  14- 
18).  Should  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  therefore  fail  of  proof, 
the  whole  scheme  falls  to  the  ground  as  utterly  baseless  and 
void. 

P.  It  is  a  momentous  issue  to  launch  upon  the  reliability 
of  human  testimony,  and  the  capacity  of  the  mind  of  man  to 
investigate  and  appreciate  it.  The  evidence,  seeing  how 
much  hangs  upon  it,  should  certainly  be  of  a  most  complete 
and  convincing  order. 

How  did  the  precaution  of  sealing  the  tomb,  and  setting  a 
watch  upon  it,  work  to  prevent  the  possibility  of  the  disciples 
abstracting  the  body  surreptitiously? 

1  HenneU's  Works,  230. 


352 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


Pheno- 
mena at 
death  of 
Jesu3. 


Among  the  others  there  are  two,  namely  Josephus  who  lived 
A.D.  40,  and  Tacitus  who  was  of  A.D.  110,  in  whose  writings 
passages  speaking  of  the  execution  of  Jesus  appear.  In  that 
in  Josephus  his  resurrection  is  also  mentioned.  Critics,  however, 
see  grounds  for  rejecting  both  as  forged  interpolations.  Josephus 
was^  Jew,  and  ever  remained  such,  and  yet  in  the  passage  in 
question  is  made  to  acknowledge  that  Jesus  was  the  Messiah. 
The  passage  in  Tacitus,  had  it  been  genuine,  would  not  have 
been  overlooked  by  all  the  early  Christian  writers  in  their 
various  disputations  with  objectors,  and  especially  by  Tertullian, 
who  quoted  largely  from  his  works,  and  the  ecclesiastical  his- 
torian Eusebius,  who  was  zealous  in  his  defence  of  the  faith 
and  greedy  of  materials  with  which  to  support  it.^ 

p. It  is  suspicious,  certainly,  that  the  condemnation  of  Jesus 

by  the  Roman  authority  should  be  at  once  of  so  improbable  a 
character,  and  destitute  of  support  from  independent  sources, 
except  in  two  passages  which  may  be  condemned  as  fabricated. 
Who  were  the  saints  of  whom  Matthew  speaks  as  having 
risen  from  their  graves  ?  To  whom  did  they  appear  ?  And 
how  was  it  that  their  graves  were  opened  as  Jesus  died,  while 
their  bodies  did  not  come  out  till  after  his  resurrection  1  What 
also  became  of  them  afterwards? 

^. I  am  unable  to  give  you  any  information  on  this  subject. 

Their  not  appearing  till  after  Jesus  rose  from  death  would 
seem  to  have  been  introduced  so  as  not  to  give  them  the  pre- 
cedence over  him  in  the  exercise  of  the  privilege  of  resurrection. 
He  is  said  to  be  "  the  first  that  should  rise  from  the  dead  " 
(Acts  xxvi.  23)  ;  "  the  firstfruits  of  them  that  slept  "  (1  Cor. 
XV.  20)  ;  "the  firstborn  from  the  dead"  (Col.  i.  18). 

p.  ..—The  statement  seems  to  me  a  very  clumsy  one.  To 
mark  and  enhance  the  death  of  the  Messiah,  nature  is  said  to 
be  convulsed,  and  these  graves  thrown  open,  but  the  exit  of  the 
saints  who  were  to  come  out  of  them  is  restrained  till  he  should 
first  have  made  his  egress  from  his  tomb  three  days  later.  And, 
after  all,  he  had  no  such  precedence  in  resurrection,  for  several 
persons  are  said  to  have  been  raised  from  the  dead  by  the  pro- 
phets of  old  and  by  himself,  two  passed  into  heaven  without 
ever  being  in  their  graves,  and  one  of  these,  namely  Ellas 

1  R.  Cooper's  Lectures  on  the  Bible,  51-54,  58-61. 


353 


.1 


mi 


is 


appeared  to  him  with  Moses  in  risen  Hfe  at  the  time  of  his 
transfiguration. 

Are  the  disturbances  of  nature  which  are  said  to  have 
occurred  at  the  crucifixion,  namely  the  preternatural  darkness 
for  three  hours,  and  the  earthquake,  mentioned  by  historians 
of  the  time  ? 

S,  They  are  not.  Two  of  the  writers  of  that  period,  namely 
the  elder  Pliny  and  Seneca,  who  both  lived  in  A.D.  79,  left 
works  "  recording  all  the  great  phenomena  of  nature,  earth- 
quakes, comets,  eclipses,"  &c.,  and  yet  mention  "nothing 
applicable  to  the  narrative  of  Matthew."^ 

P.  That  seems  to  demonstrate  that  nothing  of  the  kind 
could  really  have  occurred.  Moreover,  had  there  been  such 
phenomena,  the  other  evangelists  would  not  have  failed  to 
support  their  representations  with  these  divine  manifestations. 

Let  us  pass  to  the  next  and  concluding  event,  that  of  the  The  resur- 
resurrection.      I  understand  this  fact  to  be  the  support  of  the  ''^*'*''*''- 
crowning  doctrine  of  the  Christians,  on  which  their  hopes  of 
eternal  happiness  absolutely  depend. 

S.  It  is  so.  The  idea  is  that  without  the  sacrifice  of  the 
Messiah  all  would  perish,  and  that  by  participation  in  his 
resurrection  life  they  get  that  new  life  which  is  free  of  sin  and  its 
penal  consequences.  **  If  Christ  be  not  risen,"  says  Paul,  "  then 
is  our  preaching  vain,  and  your  faith  is  also  vain.  Yea,  and 
we  are  found  false  witnesses  of  God;  because  we  have  testified 
of  God  that  he  raised  up  Christ. — And  if  Christ  be  not  raised, 
your  faith  is  vain ;  ye  are  yet  in  your  sins.  Then  they  also 
which  are  fallen  asleep  in  Christ  are  perished  "  (1  Cor.  xv.  14- 
18).  Should  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  therefore  fail  of  proof, 
the  whole  scheme  falls  to  the  ground  as  utterly  baseless  and 
void. 

P.  It  is  a  momentous  issue  to  launch  upon  the  reliability 
of  human  testimony,  and  the  capacity  of  the  mind  of  man  to 
investigate  and  appreciate  it.  The  evidence,  seeing  how 
much  hangs  upon  it,  should  certainly  be  of  a  most  complete 
and  convincing  order. 

How  did  the  precaution  of  sealing  the  tomb,  and  setting  a 
watch  upon  it,  work  to  prevent  the  possibility  of  the  disciples 
abstracting  the  body  surreptitiously? 

1  HenneU's  Works,  230. 


354 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


S.  It  went  for  nothing.  It  is  Matthew  alone  wlio  speaks  of 
such  a  measure  being  taken,  and  even  according  to  him  it  was 
done  in  an  incomplete  manner,  and  was  finally  ineffectual. 
That  is,  he  says  that  it  was  not  till  the  day  after  the  burial 
that  the  chief  priests  thought  of  setting  the  watch,  so  that 
during  the  intervening  night  the  tomb  had  been  left  unguarded 
and  might  have  been  robbed  of  the  corpse.  And,  after  all, 
when  Jesus  is  said  to  have  arisen  on  the  third  day,  the  chief 
priests  and  elders  are  stated  to  have  consulted  together  how  to 
falsify  the  event ;  and  it  ended  in  their  giving  "  large  money 
unto  the  soldiers,  saying,  say  ye,  his  disciples  came  by  night, 
and  stole  him  away  while  we  slept."  "  And  this  saying,"  it  is 
added,  "is  commonly  reported  among  the  Jews  until  this  day" 

(^Matt.  xxviii.  11-15). 

P.  So  that  from  the  very  outset  the  resurrection  was  con- 
sidered on  the  spot  an  unreal  thing  !  But  Matthew's  statement 
appears  to  me,  on  the  face  of  it,  to  deserve  no  consideration. 
How  could  he  have  come  to  know  of  the  secret  treaty  between 
the  priests  and  the  soldiers  ?  What  sort  of  testimony  could 
the  latter  be  expected  to  give  of  what  had  happened  when 
their  eyes  were  closed  in  sleep  ?  And  would  they,  for  any 
sum,  have  subjected  themselves  to  the  penalty  for  sleeping  on 
their  posts,  which,  I  presume,  would  be  death  ? 

Let  me  hear  now  what  is  said  as  to  the  resurrection  itself. 
Be  pleased,  at  the  same  time,  to  point  out  wherever  there  may 
be  discrepancies  in  the  statements  made. 

S.  You  have  justly  expected  that  the  evidence  on  this  vital 
point  should  be  of  a  full  and  convincing  nature.  That,  how- 
ever, is  far  from  being  its  character.  No  where,  throughout 
these  narratives,  do  inconsistencies  of  the  most  violent  and 
irreconcileable  description  so  much  abound  as  in  the  accounts 
given  of  the  appearances  made  by  Jesus  after  his  death. 

Matthew  begins  by  stating  what  occuiTed  "  in  the  end  of 
the  sabbath,  as  it  began  to  dawn  toward  the  first  day  of  the 
week,"  implying  that  the  sabbath  ended  with  the  morning  of 
the  succeeding  day.  This  shows  that  the  writer,  whoever  he 
was,  was  not  aware  of  the  Jewish  division  of  the  days  from 
sunset  to  sunset.  In  the  same  way  John  (xx.  19)  speaks  of 
the  "  evening,  being  (still)  the  first  day  of  the  week,"  whereas 
the  evening  ushered  in  a  new  day. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


355 


The  earliest  visitants  to  the  tomb  were  certain  females,  one 
or  more.  Mark  says  they  were  there  "  at  the  rising  of  the 
sun  ;"  John  "when  it  was  yet  dark."  All  agree  that  Mary 
Magdalene  was  one  of  these  females.  John  represents  that 
she  was  alone  ;  Matthew  that  another  Mary  accompanied  her ; 
Mark  that  there  was  a  third  female  named  Salome;  and  Luke 
that  there  was  a  plurality  beyond  three,  his  statement  being 
that  the  party  consisted  of  "  Mary  Magdalene,  and  Joanna, 
and  Mary  the  mother  of  James,  and  other  women  that  were 
with  them  ;"  so  that  with  him  the  number  of  the  females 
must  have  been  at  the  least  five. 

Matthew  says  there  was  at  the  time  "  a  great  earthquake  ; 
for  the  angel  of  the  Lord  descended  from  heaven,  and  came 
and  rolled  back  the  stone  from  the  door  ;*'  adding,  that,  "  for 
fear  of  him,  the  keepers  did  shake,  and  became  as  dead  men." 
None  of  the  other  evangelists  speak  of  the  earthquake,  or  of 
the  descent  of  the  angel,  or  of  the  presence  of  the  keepers. 
Such  angels  as  they  describe  were  on  the  spot  when  seen,  and 
they  agree  that  the  stone  had  already  been  rolled  away. 

Matthew  states  that  there  was  an  angel  who  was  seen  seated 
on  the  stone  outside  the  sepulchre  ;  Mark  that  he  was  seated 
inside  it ;  Luke  that  there  were  two  who  were  standing, 
whether  outside  or  in  is  not  apparent ;  and  John  shows  that 
none  were  noticed  at  this  first  visit. 

Matthew  says  that  the  angel  communicated  to  the  women 
the  fact  of  the  resurrection,  and  invited  them  to  come  and 
"  see  the  place  where  the  Lord  lay,"  not  representing  that  they 
entered.  Mark  says  they  entered  the  sepulchre  of  their  own 
accord,  and  then  only  saw  the  angel,  who  thereon  told  them  of 
the  resurrection.  Luke  has  it  that  they  entered  and  discovered 
for  themselves  that  the  body  was  gone,  and  were  "  much  per- 
plexed thereabout,"  after  which  they  observed  the  angels,  who 
then  spoke  to  them.  John  states  that  directly  Mary  Magdalene, 
the  only  female  of  whom  he  speaks,  saw  that  the  stone  had 
been  rolled  away,  she  ran  off  to  communicate  the  intelligence, 
showing  thus  that  she  did  not  enter  the  sepulchre,  or  see  or 
converse  with  any  one. 

Matthew  and  Mark  say  that  the  angel  directed  the  women 
to  inform  the  disciples  that  Jesus  was  risen,  and  bid  them  go 
to  Galilee  where  he  would  appear  to  them.     Luke's  report  of 


356 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


357 


the  speech  of  the  angels  differs.  He  makes  them  exclaim, 
"Why  seek  ye  the  living  among  the  dead  ?"  and  then,  after 
telling  them  that  Jesus  had  risen,  to  add,  "  Remember  how  he 
spake  unto  you  when  he  was  yet  in  Galilee,  saying,  The  Son 
of  man  must  be  delivered  into  the  hands  of  sinful  men,  and  be 
crucified,  and  the  third  day  rise  again  ;"  nor  does  he  report 
any  message  sent  to  the  disciples  to  meet  Jesus  m  Galilee. 

Matthew  has  it  that  the  women  ''  departed  quickly  from  the 
sepulchre  with  fear  and  great  joy :  and  did  run  to  bring  his 
disciples  word."  Luke  says  that  they  ''  returned  from  the 
sepulchre,  and  told  all  these  things  unto  the  eleven,  and  to  all 
the  rest."  While  Mark  declares  that  they  "  went  out  quickly, 
and  fled  from  the  sepulchre;  for  they  trembled  and  were 
amazed  :   neither  said  they  anything  to  any  man ;    for  they 

were  afraid." 

Johns  account,  as  has  been  seen,  altogether  differs.  Me 
makes  Mary  Magdalene,  the  only  woman  he  speaks  of,  run  off 
directly  she  had  observed  that  the  stone  had  been  removed 
from  the  entrance  of  the  sepulchre.  He  says  she  went  and 
told  Peter,  and  the  disciple  ''  whom  Jesus  loved,"  that  is  John 
himself,  that  the  body  had  been  removed  ;  on  which  the  two 
run,  enter  the  sepulchre,  and  see  the  body  clothes  there,  after 
which  they  "  went  away  again  unto  their  own  home."  To 
this  time,  consequently,  according  to  John,  there  had  been  no 
apparition  of  angels.  He  represents  Mary  as  then  standmg 
-  without  at  the  sepulchre  weeping,"  and  adds,  that  on  stooping 
down,  and  looking  into  it,  she  saw  two  angels  seated  at  the 
head 'and  feet  where  the  body  had  lain.  These,  it  will  be 
noticed  had  been  invisible  to  the  men  who  had  just  before 
entered  and  examined  the  sepulchre.  The  angels  say  no  more 
to  her  than  merely  to  ask,  "  Woman,  why  weepest  thou  ?" 
Luke  has  it  that  after  the  women  had  ''  told  these  things  unto 
the  apostles,"  Peter,  singly,  ran  and  looked  into  the  sepulchre 
and  saw  the  linen,  not  however  entering  the  sepulchre.  In 
other  respects  this  whole  scene  in  John,  including  the  visit  of 
Peter  and  John,  and  the  double  visit  of  Mary,  is  peculiar  to  his 
narrative,  and  its  circumstances  are  altogether  inconsistent  with 
those  in  the  other  narratives. 

So  far  as  to  the  visit  of  the  women.     Matthew  further  states 
that  as  the  women,  two  in  number,  went  to  tell  the  disciples 


what  they  had  witnessed,  Jesus  met  them  and  repeated  the 
message  that  the  brethren  were  to  proceed  to  Galilee  where 
he  would  appear  to  them.  Mark,  though  he  speaks  of  two 
other  women  being  with  Mary  Magdalene,  represents  Jesus 
as  appearing  to  this  Mary  alone,  on  which  "  she  went  and  told 
them  that  had  been  with  him."  The  others,  seemingly,  had 
parted  company  with  her  when  all  three  fled  from  the  sepul- 
chre in  fear.  Luke  records  no  appearance  of  Jesus  to  any  of 
the  women.  John  says  that  after  Mary  Magdalene  had  been 
addressed  by  the  angels,  she  turned  and  saw  Jesus,  but  taking 
him  to  be  the  gardener  asked  him  where  the  body  was  ;  after 
which  Jesus  addressed  her,  and  gave  her  a  message  to  the 
bretliren,  this,  however,  not  relating  to  his  meeting  them  at 
Galilee,  but  to  his  approaching  ascension.  She  then  goes  and 
tells  the  disciples. 

Matthew  proceeds  to  say  that  when  Jesus  met  Mary  Mag- 
dalene and  the  other  woman  he  speaks  of,  "  they  came  and 
held  him  by  the  feet,  and  worshipped  him,"  a  procedure  to 
which  he  made  no  objection.  John  has  it  that  directly  Mary 
Magdalene,  the  only  woman  he  mentions,  had  recognised  Jesus, 
he  said  to  her,  "  Touch  me  not ;  for  I  am  not  yet  ascended  to 
my  Father,"  thus  prohibiting  her,  (for  some  unfathomable 
reason,)  putting  hand  upon  him. 

Matthew  describes  no  other  apparition  of  Jesus  on  the  day 
of  his  resurrection.      Luke  states  that  on  this  day  two  disciples 
fell  in  with  him  at  Emmaus,  a  village  "  about  three  score  fur- 
longs," or  between  seven  and  eight   miles,  from  Jerusalem. 
Thi's  'is  the  first  apparition  he  mentions,  and  he  gives  it  as 
the  first  that  had  occurred.     The  disciples  in  question,  not 
recognizing  Jesus,  recount  to  him,  as  to  a  stranger,  what  had 
happened,  and  in  speaking  of  the  death  of  Jesus,  they  say  that 
this  had  put  an  end  to  their  hopes.      ''  We  tmsted  that  it  had 
been  he  which  should  have  redeemed  Israel :  and  besides  all 
this  "  they  add,    ''  to-day  is  the  third  day  since  these   thmgs 
were  done."     Of  the  visit  of  the  females  to  the  tomb  they  were 
aware,  apparently  from  the  women  themselves,  but  evmce  entire 
ignorance  of  any  of  them  having  seen  Jesus  on  the  occasion. 
<' Yea  "they  go  on  with  their  relation  to  the  supposed  stranger, 
-  and 'certain  women  also  of  our  company  made  us  astonished, 
which  were  early  at  the  sepulchre  ;  and  when  they  found  not 


358 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


359 


his  body,  they  came,  saying  that  they  had  also  seen  a  vision 
of  angels,  which  said  that  he  was  alive.  And  certain  of  them 
which  were  with  us  went  to  the  sepulchre,  and  found  it  even  so 
as  the  women  had  said  :  but  him  they  saw  not."  This,  in  the 
most  pointed  manner,  excludes  any  apparition  of  Jesus  to  this 
time.  The  women,  in  speaking  of  the  vision  of  angels,  would 
not  have  failed  to  say  that  they  had  also  seen  the  Lord,  had 
such  been  the  case,  nor  would  this,  the  most  important  part 
of  their  statements,  have  been  kept  back  from  these  disciples. 
The  "  but  him  they  saw  not "  is  thus  applicable  to  all  who  had 
been  in  a  position  to  have  seen  him  had  he  risen,  and  it  was 
the  fact  that,  according  to  their  apprehension,  he  still  lay  in 
death,  which  filled  them  with  despondency.  Jesus  on  this 
expounds  to  them  the  scriptures  concerning  himself,  accom- 
panies them  to  their  home,  the  day  being  then  ''  far  spent," 
and  while  seated  at  meat  with  them  their  eyes  were  opened, 
they  recognised  him,  and  "  he  vanished  out  of  their  sight." 
Mark  briefly  supports  this  representation  by  saying,  "after 
that,"  that  is  after  the  appearance  to  Mary  Magdalene,  **  he 
appeared  in  another  form,  (whatever  that  may  mean,)  unto 
two  of  them,  as  they  walked,  and  went  into  the  country." 

The  two  disciples  in  question,  according  to  Luke,  returned 
at  once  to  Jerusalem,  and  finding  the  eleven  together,  told  them 
what  they  had  witnessed.  At  the  same  time  they  hear  from 
them  that  the  Lord  had  appeared  to  Simon  Peter,  though  of 
such  appearance  no  account  is  given  anywhere.  Luke  and 
John  certainly  speak  of  Peter  having  gone  to  the  tomb,  but 
they  show  that  he  then  saw  nothing  except  the  clothes  in  which 
the  body  had  been  wrapped.  Luke  goes  on  to  say  that  while 
all  were  thus  together,  Jesus  suddenly  "  stood  in  the  midst  of 
them,"  and  on  this  occasion,  though  apparently  he  had  still 
not  yet  ascended  to  his  Father,  so  far  from  objecting  to  contact 
with  his  body,  as  when,  according  to  John,  he  fell  in  with 
Mary  Magdalene  that  same  day,  he  actually  invited  it.  **  Be- 
hold," he  said,  "  my  hands  and  my  feet,  that  it  is  I  myself : 
handle  me  and  see ;  for  a  spirit  hath  not  flesh  and  bones,  as 
ye  see  me  have."  Upon  this  he  partook  "  of  a  broiled  fish, 
and  of  an  honey  comb,"  and  then,  after  expounding  to  them 
the  prophecies  concerning  himself,  he  led  them  out  to  Bethany, 
and  thereupon  "  was  parted  from  them,  and  carried  up  into 


heaven."  Mark  confirms  this  account  with  brevity.  He  says, 
"  afterward,"  that  is,  after  the  meeting  with  the  two  at  Emmaus, 
"  he  appeared  unto  the  eleven  as  they  sat  at  meat,"  and  de- 
scribing a  communication  made  to  them,  he  concludes  by  saying, 
"  So  then,  after  the  Lord  had  spoken  unto  them,  he  was 
received  up  into  heaven,  and  sat  on  the  right  hand  of  God." 
John  also  describes  this  appearance  to  the  apostles,  noticing 
that  "  the  doors  were  shut "  when  Jesus  suddenly  "  stood  in 
the  midst."  He  states  that  Thomas  was  not  of  the  party, 
though  Luke  has  it  that  the  eleven  were  all  present.  He  also 
reports  the  words  used  by  Jesus  difi'erently,  and  says  nothmg 
of  his  having  expounded  the  scriptures  to  them,  or  partaken 
of  food  with  them. 

This  concludes  the  events  of  the  day  of  the  resurrection ; 
and  the  narratives  of  Mark  and  Luke,  as  will  be  seen,  admit 
of  no  more  apparitions,  as,  pursuant  to  them,  after  appearing 
to  the  eleven,  Jesus  ascended  into  heaven,  and  took  up  tho 
seat  there  appointed  to  him,  on  ''  the  right  hand  of  God." 

Matthew,  however,  goes  on  with  a  further  exhibition.     His 
statement  was  that  it  was  in  Galilee  that  Jesus  had  intimated 
he   would  appear  to   the  apostles.      He,  accordingly,  has   it 
that    ''the   eleven  disciples   went   away   into   Galilee,  into   a 
mountain  where  Jesus  had  appointed  them.      And  when  they 
saw   him   they  worshipped   him."      This   excludes  the  prior 
meetings  in  Judea  to  the  two  disciples  at  Emmaus,  and  to  the 
eleven  apostles  at  Jerusalem.     It  excludes  also  the  ascension 
to  heaven,  with  which  the  last  of  these   meetings  is  said  to 
have  terminated.     From   Jerusalem  to  the  southern  limit  of 
Galilee  is  over  fifty  miles  in  a  direct  line.     In  what  part  of 
Galilee  the  appearance  mentioned  by  Matthew  took  place  is 
not   described,  but  it  is   evident  that  it  must   have   occupied 
the  disciples  more  days  than  one  to  get  there.     The   resort 
of  Jesus  to  earth,  after  his  resurrection,  is  consequently  pro- 
loncred  by  so  much  beyond  the  time  stated  by  Mark  and  Luke. 
No  other  evangelist  speaks  of  this  particular  apparition,  al- 
though  Mark,   inconsistently   with   his    statement  that  Jesus 
saw  and   parted  with  the  disciples  in  Judea,  confirms  Matthew 
in  saying  that  the  meeting  was  appointed  in  Galilee. 

John  has  two  other  apparitions  which  are  excluded  by  the 
narratives  of  Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke.     He  had  said  that 


360 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


361 


Thomas  was  not  present  when  Jesus  appeared  among  the 
other  apostles  at  Jerusalem.  He  represents  Thomas,  when 
told  of  this  appearance,  as  refusing  credence  thereto,  saying, 
"  Except  I  shall  see  in  his  hands  the  print  of  the  nails, 
and  put  my  finger  into  the  print  of  the  nails,  and  thrust  my 
hand  into  his  side,  I  will  not  believe."  Upon  this,  Jesus,  to 
convince  him,  appears  to  the  eleven  again  eight  days  after- 
wards. He  comes,  as  before,  standing  in  the  midst  of  them, 
the  doors  at  the  time  "  being  shut,"  and  he  then  gives  Thomas 
the  ocular  and  tangible  evidence  he  had  demanded.  This 
places  Jesus  on  earth  eight  days  longer  than  mentioned  by 
Mark  and  Luke. 

John  proceeds  to  recount  a  further  meeting,  and  he  states  this 
to  have  been  in  Galilee,  not  saying,  however,  when  it  occurred. 
Jesus  comes  upon  Peter  and  six  others  as  they  were  fishing  at 
the  sea  of  Tiberias  or  Galilee,  and  leads  them  to  make  a 
miraculous  draft  of  fishes.  On  coming  on  shore  they  find 
a  fire,  with  fish  laid  on  it,  ready  for  them,  this,  apparently, 
having  been  provided  supernatu rally.  Jesus  partakes  of  bread 
and  fish  with  them,  and  holds  communication  with  them  on 
sundry  subjects.  "  This,"  says  John,  '*  is  now  the  third  time 
that  Jesus  showed  himself  to  his  disciples  after  that  he  was 
risen  from  the  dead,"  an  enumeration  which  excludes  the 
apparition  on  a  mountain  in  Galilee,  described  by  Matthew 
as  the  particular  occasion  on  which  Jesus  exhibited  himself 
to  them.  And  "there  are  also  many  other  things,"  John 
declares,  "  which  Jesus  did,  the  which,  if  they  should  be 
written,  every  one,  I  suppose  that  even  the  world  itself  could 
not  contain  the  books  that  should  be  written." 

Paul,  whose  writings  are  considered  to  have  been  put  for- 
ward before  the  gospels  appeared,  speaks  of  apparitions  of 
Jesus  which  ill  accord  with  what  is  to  be  found  in  these 
narratives.  He  states  that  "  he  was  seen  of  Cephas  (Peter), 
then  of  the  twelve,"  (there  being  but  eleven  apostles  existing 
at  the  time).  "  After  that,"  he  goes  on  to  say,  "  he  was  seen 
of  above  five  himdred  brethren  at  once. — After  that — of  James  ; 
then  of  all  the  apostles.  And,  last  of  all,  he  was  seen  of 
me  also,"  he  adds,  "as  of  one  born  out  of  due  time"  (1  Cor. 
XV.  3-8).  Of  the  apparition  to  the  five  hundred  the  four 
evangelists  say  nothing ;  and  had  there  been  a  manifestation 


t 


of  so  marked  and  important  a  sort,  they  could  not  have  failed 
to  have  known  thereof  and  to  have  mentioned  it.  Their 
silence,  consequently,  excludes  such  apparition ;  and  it  is, 
furthermore,  directly  negatived  by  other  statements.  Peter 
is  made  to  declare  that  Jesus  was  shown,  "  not  to  all  the 
people,  but  unto  witnesses  chosen  before  of  God,  even  to  us 
(the  apostles),  who  did  eat  and  drink  with  him  after  he  rose 
from  the  dead"  (Acts  x.  41).  According  to  this  he  could 
not  have  exhibited  himself  to  such  a  concourse  as  Paul  de- 
scribes ;  nor  were  there,  at  this  early  period,  so  many  as  five 
hundred  brethren  to  whom  he  could  have  shown  himself,  the 
whole  number,  when  congregated  together,  amounting  to  but 
"about  an  hundred  and  twenty  "  (1  Acts  i.  15). 

The  exhibitions  to  the  apostles,  according  to  the  Acts,  were 
far  more  numerous,  and  extended  over  a  much  more  lengthened 
time,  than  the  accounts  of  any  of  the  evangelists,  except,  pos- 
sibly, that  of  John,  will  allow  of.  To  them  he  is  said  to  have 
shown  himself  alive  after  his  passion  by  many  infallible  proofs, 
beino-  seen  of  them  forty  days,  and  speaking  of  the  things  per- 
taining to  the  kingdom  of  God"  (i.  3;;  but  the  writer  of  this 
book  has  not  thought  proper  to  describe  any  of  these  mani- 
festations, or  to  put  on  record  the  communications  respecting 
the  future  kingdom  which  are  said  to  have  been  so  liberally 
made.  Such  a  generalizing  of  matters  so  wondrous,  and  of  so 
areat  consequence  to  be  thoroughly  known  and  understood, 
certainly  ill  consists  with  reality.  He  tells  us  something  that 
passed  at  the  last  apparition,  and  then  describes  the  ascension; 
but  differently  from  Mark  and  Luke,  represents  it  to  have 
taken  place  from  the  mount  of  Olives,  and  to  have  been 
attended  by  a  vision  of  angels  (i.  9-12).  .,  ^     r  ^  • 

I  pass  now  to  the  concluding  instructions  Jesus  is  said  to  l^ -^^ 
have  communicated  as  he  took  his  final  leave  of  the  apostles       of  Jesus. 

Matthew's  account  is  that  he  said,  "All  power  is  given  unto 
me  in  heaven  and  in  earth.  Go  ye,  therefore  and  teax^h  all 
nations,  baptizing  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the 
Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost:  teaching  them  to  observe  all 
things  whatsoever  I  have  commanded  you  :  and  lo,  \  am  with 
you  alway,  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world.  Amen.  Mark 
describes  a  similar  mission,  but  in  different  terms.  Go  ye 
into  all  the  world,  and  ^veach  the  gospel  to  every  creature. 


If, 


362 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


He  that  believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved ;  but  he  that 
believeth  not  shall  be  damned."  And  then  he  represents 
Jesus  as  describing  the  miraculous  powers  which  were  to  be 
possessed  by  ''  them  that  believe/' 

lliat  any  such  instructions  were  imparted  to  the  apostles  is, 
however,  negatived  by  their  subsequent  conduct.  It  required 
a  special  revelation  to  be  conveyed  symbolically  to  Peter  to  show 
him  that  he  was  at  liberty  to  communicate  the  faith  to  the 
Gentiles  and  hold  fellowship  with  them.  After  describing  the 
vision  displayed  to  him  to  induce  him  to  act  upon  the  desire 
of  the  centurion  Cornelius,  and  those  with  him,  to  hear  the 
gospel,  he  says,  addressing  the  parties,  "  Ye  know  that  it  is 
an  unlawful  thing  for  a  man  that  is  a  Jew  to  keep  company, 
or  come  imto  one  of  another  nation  ;  but  God  hath  showed  me 
that  I  should  not  call  any  man  common  or  unclean"  (Acts  x. 
28).  For  this  association  with  the  "  uncircumcised "  he  was 
rebuked  by  the  other  apostles,  notwithstanding  that  the  act 
had  been  successful  in  converting  those  thus  addressed;  where- 
upon Peter  justified  himself  by  recounting  the  vision  vouch- 
safed to  him.  To  none  did  it  occur  to  cite  the  instructions  of 
Jesus  that  the  gospel  should  be  preached  to  "all  nations;" 
whence  there  is  room  to  conclude,  not  only  that  no  such  in- 
structions had  been  given,  but  that  the  occasion  for  them, 
when  they  are  said  to  have  been  uttered,  namely,  at  a  reap- 
pearance of  Jesus  after  death,  had  not  occurred.  However,  to 
revert  to  these  statements,  according  to  them,  the  apostles  were 
at  once  deputed  to  preach  the  gospel,  being  fully  endowed  for 
the  office.  Jesus  had  received  "  all  power  in  heaven  and  in 
earth,"  and  in  the  plenitude  of  this  power  sent  them  forth. 
John  puts  the  same  matter  before  us,  but  under  different  cir- 
cumstances. "  Peace  be  unto  you,"  Jesus  is  reported  to  have 
said;  "  as  my  Father  hath  sent  me,  even  so  send  I  you.  And 
when  he  had  said  this,  he  breathed  on  them,  and  saith  unto 
them,  Eeceive  ye  the  Holy  Ghost :  Whose  soever  sins  ye  remit, 
they  are  remitted  unto  them  ;  and  whose  soever  sins  ye  retain, 
they  are  retained."  This  power  of  remission,  or  condemnation, 
said  to  have  been  entrusted  to  the  apostles,  was  one  fraught 
with  consequences  to  their  fellow-creatures  of  such  stupendous 
importance  that  it  is  impossible  to  believe  that  every  one  but 
John  should  have  kept  silence  on  the  subject,  had  the  destinies 


f 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


363 


of  mankind  been  so  committed  to  this  early  body  of  the  fol- 
lowers of  Jesus.  John,  however,  as  we  see,  corresponds  with 
Matthew  and  Mark  in  showing  that  the  disciples  were  at  once 
sent  forth  fully  empowered  for  their  work.  Where  he  differs 
is  in  representing  this  mission  having  been  conferred  upon  them 
at  one  of  the  intermediate  apparitions  of  Jesus,  and  not  at  his 
last  appearing.  He  places  the  mission  at  the  same  meeting 
alleged  for  it  by  Mark  ;  but  then  he  has  two  other  apparitions 
occurring  subsequently,  with  opening  for  an  indefinite  number 

more. 

When  we  pass  to  the  statement  of  Luke  the  character  of  the 
transaction  is  greatly  changed.      The  apostles  were  to  preach 
"  repentance   and    remission  of  sins"   in  the  name   of  Jesus 
"  among  all  nations,"  but  they  were  restricted  to  "  beginnmg 
at  Jerusalem."     Nor  were  they  to  operate  there  till  specially 
empowered  from  above ;  and  for  the  necessary  gift  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  thev  were  to  remain   in  Jerusalem.      "  And,  behold,  I 
send  the  promise  of  my  Father  upon  you  ;  but  tarry  ye  in  the 
city  of  Jerusalem,  until  ye  be  endued  with  power  from  on  high." 
And  the  statement  in  the  Acts  accords  with  this.     It  is  there 
said  that  Jesus  "being  assembled  together"  with  the  apostles, 
"  commanded  them  that  they  should  not  depart  from  Jerusalem, 
but  wait  for  the  promise  of  the  Father,  which,  saith  he,  ye 
have  heard  of  me.      For  John  truly  baptized  with  water  ;  but 
ye  shall  be  baptized  with  the  Holy  Ghost  not  many  days  hence. 
Ye  shall  receive  power,  after  that  the  Holy  Ghost  is  come  upon 
you  :  and  ye  shall  be  witnesses  unto  me  both  in  Jerusalem,  and 
in  all  Judea,  and  in  Samaria,  and  unto  the  uttermost  part  of 
the  earth."     The   account   in   Luke  restricts  aU    the    events 
recorded  by  him  to  the  limits  of  one  day      The  women  visit 
the  sepulchre  on  the  morning  of  the  resurrection,  the  two  dis- 
ciples at  Emmaus  meet  with  Jesus  "that  same  day"  he  stays 
with  them  till  "toward  evening,"  and  then  vanished.      The 
disciples  "the  same  hour"  seek  the  apostles  at  Jerusalem,  and 
while  with  them  Jesus  again  appears.      It  is  on  this  occasion 
that  he  entrusts  the  apostles  with  their  mission,  and  bids  thena 
"  tarry  in  the  city  of  Jerusalem"  till  endowed  with  the  promised 
power  to  carry  it  out  "  from  on  high ;"  after  which  he  leads  them 
out  to  Bethany,  and  ascends  to  heaven.      The  power  m  question, 
namely,  the  descent  upon  them  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  is  conferred, 


E>   il 


I  f 


364 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


365 


Actualities 
of  death 
and  resur- 
rection. 


according  to  the  Acts,  at  Pentecost,  fifty  days  afterwards. 
Luke's  narrative  is  thus  not  only  conclusive  as  to  the  mani- 
festations of  Jesus  being  confined  to  one  day,  but  to  the 
apostles  abiding  in  Jerusalem  till  the  expiration  of  fifty  days 
more;  so  that  it  excludes  the  appointment  Jesus  is  said  by 
Matthew  and  Mark  to  have  made  to  meet  them  in  Galilee, — the 
consequent  journey  of  the  apostles  to  Galilee,  and  their  seeing 
Jesus  there  on  a  mountain,  as  stated  by  Matthew, — the  second 
manifestation  he  makes  of  himself  eight  days  after  the  resur- 
rection in  Jerusalem,'  and  the  third  taking  place  in  Galilee,  as 
stated  by  John, — and  the  forty  days'  resort  to  earth,  as  declared 
in  the  book  of  Acts.  On  the  other  hand,  John's  statement  that 
the  Holy  Ghost  was  personally  imparted  to  the  apostles  by 
Jesus  at  the  close  of  the  day  of  his  resurrection,  excludes  the 
statements  appearing  in  Luke  and  the  Acts  that  this  endow- 
ment was  withheld  till  Pentecost,  and  then  accomplished. 

The  Christian  creed  depends  altogether  upon  the  occurrence 
of  the  death  and  resurrection  of  Jesus.  These  are  facts,  the 
realization  of  which  should  have  been  so  described  as  to  place 
them  beyond  all  room  for  question.  But  the  narratives  have 
not  been  thus  framed.  The  death  by  crucifixion  was  one 
brought  about  by  no  attack  upon  any  vital  organ,  but  simply 
by  exhaustion.  Criminals  have  been  known  to  hang  for  days 
on  the  cross  before  the  vital  spark  became  extinguished.  Jesus 
was  there  but  six  hours  at  the  most,  when  he  is  said  to  have 
given  up  the  ghost,  and  Pilate  was  surprised  to  hear  that  he 
was  already  dead.  He  is  said  to  have  cried  out  "  with  a  loud 
voice"  as  he  expired,  which  is  inconsistent  with  death  occurring 
from  exhaustion.  The  incident  of  the  spear  being  afterwards 
driven  into  his  side  is  mentioned  by  John  alone.  Luke  says 
at  his  apparition  to  the  eleven  ''  he  showed  them  his  hands 
and  his  feet,"  there  being  no  mention  of  a  wound  in  the  side, 
which  is  thus  ignored.  John,  to  be  consistent  with  his  own 
representations,  introduces  mention  of  the  side,  but  in  terms 
that  are  obviously  exaggerated.  The  wound  is  said  to  be  of 
that  magnitude  that  Thomas  might  thrust  his  hand  into  it. 
If  so,  something  more  would  have  protruded  than  the  alleged 
blood  and  water.  Pilate's  surprise  at  the  death  having  occurred 
when  the  time  came  for  taking  down  the  corpse  for  its  burial, 
shows  that  he  had  not  authorized  its  being  expedited  by  violent 


means,  as  represented  by  John.  Not  therefore  admitting  the 
statement  of  this  wound,  it  is  within  the  bounds  of  possibility 
that  the  case  may  have  been  one  of  suspended  animation,  and 
not  death.  The  body  passes  at  once  into  friendly  hands.  It 
is  taken  to  a  sepulchre  close  by,  where  Joseph  of  Arimathaea 
and  Nicodemus  are  occupied  with  it.  They  are  said  to  have 
embalmed  it,  but  that  is  contradicted  by  the  statement  appear- 
ing elsewhere  that  the  women  came  to  perform  this  teisk  on 
the  third  day  afterwards.  They  may  have  been  otherwise  en- 
gaged, namely,  in  applying  remedial  measures.  There  is  a  tale 
of  a  watch  being  set  upon  the  tomb,  but  this  is  confined  to 
Matthew,  and  is  full  of  improbabilities  ;  and  even  Matthew 
shows  that  for  one  night  the  place  was  left  unguarded.  There 
is  no  witness  to  the  actual  occurrence  of  the  resurrection.  The 
tomb  is  visited  on  the  third  day  and  found  to  be  empty,  and 
Jesus  afterwards  appears  and  shows  himself  for  one  day  or 
more,  according  as  to  which  of  the  conflicting  narratives  may 
be  preferred.  What  is  there,  of  a  conclusive  sort,  to  negative 
the  supposition  that  Jesus  was  not  really  dead  when  taken 
down  from  the  cross,  that  his  friends  may  have  resuscitated 
him,  and  that  he  afterwards  exhibited  himself  as  if  raised  from 
the  dead  ?  His  appearing,  as  Luke  points  out,  not  as  "a 
spirit,"  but  with  ''  flesh  and  bones,"  and  his  partaking  of  food, 
favour  this  idea,  as  does  the  circumstance  that  he  showed  him- 
self, ''  not  to  all  the  people,"  but  to  *'  witnesses  chosen,"  namely, 
a  select  few  who  were  his  friends,  and  these  assembled  with 
closed  doors.  His  passing  through  these  doors,  and  his  ascen- 
sion to  heaven,  are  additions  that  might  readily  be  made  if  the 
resuscitation  were  converted  into  a  resurrection  from  the  dead. 

But  the  narratives  of  the  resurrection  are  so  put,  in  utter  ^^^^P^*^^»- 
conflict  with  one  another,  that  much   higher  ground  must  of  crepandes 
necessity  be  taken.      They  vary  at  every  approachable  point  ^rrectLn.' 
to  a  degree  too  decided,  and  too  frequent,  to  be  reconcileable 
with  the  idea  that  the  facts  are  true  and  the  narrators  well  in- 
formed ;    and  one  set  of  facts  invariably  excludes  the  other. 
When  all  is  taken  into  account,  the  result  of  the  examination 
is,  that  not  a  single  circumstance  remains  which  is  not  rendered 
impossible  of  occurrence  by  some  other  circumstance. 

The   opening   scene,   especially,   namely,   the   visit   of   the 
females  to  the  sepulchre,  is  so  replete  with  discrepancies,  that 


9 


I 


s 


366 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


if  an  enemy  to  the  reception  of  these  narratives  had  purposely 
introduced  the  discords,  they  hardly  could  have  been  more 
numerous,  or  more  complete  in  their  conflict.  It  is  uncertain 
whether  this  visit  was  made  at  sunrise,  or  while  it  was  dark  ; 
whether  one  woman,  or  two,  or  three,  or  five,  and  possibly 
more,  made  it ;  whether  one  woman  made  the  visit  twice,  or 
only  once  ;  whether  the  women  were  permitted  to  touch  the 
person  of  Jesus,  or  prohibited  so  doing  ;  whether  either  two 
men,  or  only  one,  also  went  to  the  sepulchre ;  whether  there 
was  an  earthquake  and  a  descent  of  an  angel  or  not ;  whether 
the  stone  at  the  door  was  there  on  their  amval,  or  had  previ- 
ously been  rolled  away ;  whether  there  was  but  one  angel,  and 
he  seated  outside  the  tomb,  or  within  it,  or  whether  there 
were  two  angels  who  were  standing,  or  no  angels  on  this  first 
occasion  at  all ;  whether  the  women  entered  the  sepulchre  or 
not ;  and  whether  they  told  any  one  of  what  they  had  seen 

or  not. 

It  is  furthermore  uncertain  whether  the  disciples  were 
enjoined  to  proceed  to  Galilee,  or  directed  to  tarry  in  Jeru- 
salem ;  and  whether  the  manifestation  of  Jesus  was  made  to 
them,  according  to  special  appointment,  in  Galilee,  or  occurred, 
actually,  more  than  once,  in  Judea  and  Jerusalem;  and  every 
narrated  speech,  whether  uttered  by  the  angels,  the  females, 
or  by  Jesus,  though  professing  to  be  given  verbatim  as  spoken, 
differs  altogether,  as  reported,  in  each  several  account. 

There  are  in  all  ten  manifestations  of  Jesus  declared  to  have 
taken  place,  without  counting  that  said  by  Paul  to  have  been 
vouchsafed  to  himself,  after  the  ascension,  as  to  "one  born  out  of 
due  time."    The  issues  of  these  I  will  proceed  to  particularize. 

(1.)  Jesus  appears  to  Mary  Madgalene  and  another,  or  to 
Mary  alone,  early  on  the  morning  of  the  resurrection.  This 
is  excluded  by  Luke,  who  shows  that  late  in  the  day  it  was 
only  known  that  they  had  had  a  vision  of  angels. 

(2.)  He  appears  in  the  evening  to  two  disciples  at  Emmaus, 
within  a  few  miles  of  Jerusalem.  This  is  excluded  by  Matthew, 
who  represents  that  Jesus  was  next  to  appear  in  Galilee,  and 
did  so.  It  is  excluded  also  by  John,  who,  in  enumerating  the 
apparitions,  leaves  no  more  room  for  this  one. 

(3.)  He  appears  the  same  day  to  the  eleven  as  they  sat  at 
meat  in  Jerusalem.      This  is  excluded  by  Matthew's  state- 


■ 


*^* 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


367 


ment  that  the  exhibition  to  them  was  to  be  in  Galilee,  and 

was  so.  1  r  J 

(4.)  He  appears  again  to  the  eleven  eight  days  afterwards 

in  Jerusalem.  This  is  excluded  by  the  statement  as  to  Galilee 
being  the  place  of  meeting  made  by  Matthew,  and  by  the  de- 
clarations of  Mark  and  Luke  that  the  ascension  took  place  at 
the  close  of  the  day  of  the  resurrection. 

(5.)  He  appears  to  the  eleven  for  the  first  time,  on  a  moun- 
tain in  Galilee,  some  days  after  that  of  the  resurrection.  This 
is  excluded  by  the  statements  of  his  apparition  to  them  m 
Jerusalem  on  the  day  of  the  resurrection,  and  of  his  ascension 
at  the  end  of  the  same  day.  Also  by  the  order  that  they  were 
to  remain  in  Jerusalem  till  endowed  with  the  Holy  Ghost  at 

Pentecost. 

(6.)  He  appears  to  certain  of  the  apostles  when  fishing  in 
the  sea  of  Galilee  at  least  ten  days  after  the  resurrection.  This 
is  excluded  by  his  having  ascended  to  heaven  the  same  day 
that  he  rose  from  the  dead,  and  by  the  apostles  having  been 
required  to  remain  in  Jerusalem  till  Pentecost. 

(7.)  He  appears  first  to  Peter,  as  declared  by  Paul.  This  is 
excluded  by  the  first  appearance  having  been  to  females,  either 
two  or  one,  as  stated  by  Matthew,  Mark,  and  John,  or  else  to 
the  two  disciples  at  Emmaus  as  stated  by  Luke  ;  and  also  by 
the  accounts  in  Luke  and  John  to  the  effect  that  Peter  singly, 
or  with  another,  merely  looked  into  the  tomb  and  saw  only  the 

grave  clothes. 

(8.)  After  an  appearance  to  "  the  twelve,"  he  shows  himseit 
to  more  than  five  hundred  brethren  at  once,  as  also  said  by 
Paul.  This  is  excluded  by  there  having  been  but  about  a 
hundred  and  twenty  brethren  in  all,  by  the  apparitions  having 
been  made  "  not  to  all  the  people,"  but  only  to  chosen  wit- 
nesses, and  by  the  ascension  having  taken  place  after  the  ex- 
hibition to  "  the  eleven." 

(9,  10.)  He  subsequently  appears  to  James,  and  afterwards 
again  to  all  the  apostles.  These  are  excluded  by  the  ascension 
having  occurred  after  he  had  once  shown  himself  to  the  eleven. 

Finally,  as  to  the  fact  of  the  ascension,  Luke  describes  it  to 
have  occurred  on  the  day  of  the  resurrection  at  Bethany. 
Matthew  leaves  it  to  be  inferred  that  it  took  place  some  days 
later  from  a  mountain  in  Galilee,  the  last  instructions  by  Jesus 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


369 


3G8 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


to  the  apostles,  in  parting  with  them,  having  been  given  there. 
John  shows  that  it  had  not  occurred  at  least  ten  days  after 
the  resurrection,  the  appearance  in  Galilee  he  speaks  of  having 
taken  place  at  the  earliest  then  ;  and  the  book  of  the  Acts 
declares  that  it  happened  at  the  mount  of  Olives,  and  not 
until  forty  days  after  the  resurrection. 

P. — Assuredly  you  leave  one  nothing  connected  with  this 
marvellous  event  upon  which  the  mind  can  rest  in  the  assur- 
ance of  its  occurrence.  It  is  impossible,  in  this  maze  of  con- 
tradictions, to  select  any  one  of  the  descriptions  of  the  appear- 
ance of  Jesus  as  absolutely  to  be  depended  on.  Directly  you 
contemplate  one  account  it  becomes  negatived  by  another. 
And  upon  the  exercise  of  faith  in  this  stupendous  miracle  our 
eternal  welfare  is,  I  understand,  made  to  depend  ! 

S, — It  is  so.      *'  He  that  believeth  not  shall  be  damned," 

as    Jesus  himself  declared  on   one  of  these   occasions   (Mark 

xvi.  16). 

Reception         P. — That  is  certainly  startling.      How  were  the  disciples 

?Jrliur-'^  themselves    prepared    for    the   event?      And    how   did    they 

rection  by    accept  the  evidence  as  offered  to  them  by  others,  or  presented 

the  dia-  ^  in 

cipies.         personally  to  themselves  ? 

S. — Although  Jesus  had  repeatedly  told  them,  when  in  life, 
that  he  was  to  be  killed  and  raised  again  the  third  day,  they 
had  no  expectation  of  his  resurrection,  and  were  taken  quite 
by  surprise  when  it  actually  occurred.  And  although  he  had 
raised  three  persons  from  death  in  their  presence,  and  had 
conferred  the  same  power  upon  themselves,  whether  exercised 
or  not,  and  though  he  was  known  to  them  as  a  divine  personage 
over  whom  death  could  have  no  real  hold,  it  was  with  the 
utmost  difficulty  that  they  could  even  believe  their  senses 
when  they  saw  him  alive  again.  They  fly  when  he  is  arrested, 
and  mourn  at  his  death  as  if  he  were  a  common  mortal  with 
whom  they  had  parted  for  ever.  Joseph  of  Arimathaea  and 
Nicodemus  occupy  themselves  in  embalming  his  body,  not 
dreaming  that  it  was  to  rise  in  life.  The  women  prepare 
spices,  and  come  to  the  tomb  for  the  same  purpose.  When 
they  find  the  tomb  empty,  they  are  "  much  perplexed,"  and 
require  to  be  reminded  by  the  angels  that  he  had  prophesied 
that  he  would  rise  that  third  day.  When  they  report  ''  all 
these  things"  to  the  apostles,  giving  them  the  assurance  of  the 


angels  of  the  accomplishment  of  the  prophecy,  their  words  are 
treated  "as  idle  tales,"  and  not  believed.     Peter  and  John  go 
to  the  tomb  to  satisfy  themselves,  ignorant  "as  yet"  of  the 
scripture   "that  he  must  rise  again  from  the  dead."     Mary 
Magdalene  goes  to  them  who  had  been  with  Jesus,  and  tells 
them  that  she  has  seen  him  alive  again,  and  they  believe  her 
not     The  two  who  met  him  at  Emmaus,  although  they  had 
heard  of  the  vision  of  angels  seen  by  the  women,  remained 
without  hope.      They  had  thought  that  Jesus  "  had  been  he 
which  should  have  redeemed  Israel,"  and  his  death  presented 
to  them  an  insuperable  bar  to  his  action.      They  had  no  belief 
in  his  resurrection,  whatever  the  angels  might  have  said,  or 
he  himself  have  prophesied.     And  after  he  had  appeared   to 
themselves,    and    they  take  their  testimony  to   the  residue, 
*'  neither  believed  they  them."     Thomas  is  stout  indeed  in  his 
incredulity.      The  resurrections  wrought  by  Jesus  had  no  effect 
upon  him ;   nor  his  repeated  predictions  that  he  should  him- 
self come  to  life  again  :  nor  the  declaration  of  Mary  Magdalene, 
that  angels  had  told  her  he  had  risen,  and  that  she  had  seen 
him  herself ;  nor  the  corroboration  of  her  testimony  given  by 
the  two  at  Emmaus,  that  he  had  appeared  also  to  them  ;  nor 
the  positive  statements  of  the  ten  other  apostles,  that  he  had 
been  in   their  midst  taking  food  with  them.      Nothing   but 
personal  demonstration  to  himself  of  the  most  convincing  kind 
would  satisfy  him  of  the  identity  of  Jesus  in  life.      And^when 
thQ  disciples,  according  to  appointment,  went  to  meet  him  on 
the  mountain  in  Galilee,  "  some,"  not  crediting  the  evidence  of 
their  own  eyes,  still  "  doubted." 

P. — It  is  hard  that  we  who  receive  these  facts,  from  whom 
we  know  not,  and  through  how  many  diverse  transmitted 
channels  it  is  impossible  to  trace,  by  the  medium  of  a  book  of 
no  ascertained  authorship,  should  be  required  to  accept  them 
at  the  peril  of  our  eternal  salvation,  when  the  immediate 
followers  of  Jesus  are  represented  to  have  had  no  reliance  in 
his  words,  or  in  those  of  their  associates,  or  even,  as  respects 
some  of  them,  in  the  evidence  of  their  own  senses.  Belief  is 
not  to  be  attained  by  the  will.  It  must  be  induced  by  ade- 
quate and  reliable  testimony,  and  the  more  wondrous  the  subject 
presented  for  belief,  the  more  complete  and  indisputable  should 
be  the  evidence.     In   the  present   instance,  the  fact   offered 

2  A 


570 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


runs  counter  to  all  experience,  and  the  statements  of  it  are 
such  as  would  not  be  accepted  in  proof  of  any  circumstance 
whatsoever.  When  considered  together,  these  statements  defeat 
each  other  very  effectually.  If  Jesus  repeatedly  predicted  his 
death  upon  the  cross,  and  his  resurrection,  when  his  death 
came  about  as  foretold,  the  disciples  must  necessarily  have  been 
in  expectation  of  the  further  fulfilment  to  be  accomplished  in 
his  resurrection.  They  had  seen  him  bring  others  to  life,  they 
knew  of  his  divine  origin  and  infinite  power.  He  had  said 
that  death  could  have  no  hold  over  him,  and  they  had  only  to 
wait  to  the  third  day  to  see  his  promised  return  to  life  brought 
to  pass.  They  could  not  possibly,  one  and  all,  have  dismissed 
his  words  from  their  minds  and  forgotten  that  he  ever  made 
such  a  prediction.  Nor  could  they,  or  any  of  them,  have 
refused  belief  in  his  return  to  life  when  the  fact  was  so  repeat- 
edly attested  and  forced  upon  them  by  his  bodily  presence. 
Either  the  disciples  had  had  no  such  aids  to  the  exercise  of 
their  faith,  there  had  been  no  such  predictions  uttered  by  Jesus, 
and  no  resurrections,  in  the  case  of  others,  wrought  by  him,  or 
the  narrators,  in  depicting  their  hardness  of  belief,  have  been 
seeking  to  give  effect  to  their  representations  by  a  condition 
of  things  wholly  imaginative.  Wlien  the  facts  themselves,  as 
presented  in  regard  to  the  resurrection,  are  found  unreliable, 
it  is  easy  to  understand  that  the  concomitants  should  be  want- 
ing in  the  complexion  of  probability  and  truth. 
Jesus  ris-  I  observe  it  prominently  insisted  on  that  Jesus  reappeared 

natural        in  his  proper  natural  body,  with  the  same  flesh,  bones,  and 
body.  wounds,  he  had  before  his  death.     Is  it  a  feature  of  the  faith 

of  the  Christians  that  their  resurrection  is  to  be  carried  out  in 
this  physical  manner  ? 

>S'. — It  is  not.  Paul  answered  the  question,  "  How  are  the 
dead  raised  up  ?"  by  saying  that  there  were  two  bodies,  a 
natural  and  a  spiritual  one,  that  we  are  sown,  or  buried,  as  in 
the  natural  body,  and  raised  in  the  spiritual  one;  and  he  dis- 
tinctly declared  that  "flesh  and  blood  cannot  inherit  the 
kingdom  of  heaven,"  putting  it  that  this  would  amount  to 
*'  corruption  "  inheriting  "  incorruption,"  which  could  not  be 
(1  Cor.  XV.  35-54). 

P. — And  yet  Jesus  is  described  as  having  passed  into  heaven 
in  his  natural  body  !     I  presume  also  that  the  others,  who  in 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


371 


the  Old  Testament  are  said  to  have  been  translated  without 
experiencing  death,  did  so  likewise. 

S, — You  refer  to  Enoch  and  Elijah.  The  statements  cer- 
tainly make  them  ascend  in  the  bodies  they  had  while  in  life. 

P. — Paul  should  assuredly  have  accounted  for  these  phe- 
nomena which  were  so  much  against  the  order  he  laid  down. 
But  perhaps  he  did  not  hold  that  Jesus  rose  from  the  dead  and 
showed  himself  in  his  natural  body.  In  what  aspect,  for  ex- 
ample, was  Jesus  presented  to  himself,  when  he  saw  him  as 
*'  one  born  out  of  due  time  1 " 

S, — There  are  three  accounts  of  the  circumstance  on  which  A.ppear- 
this  alleged  vision  of  the  risen  Jesus  is  based,  one  given  by  the  jesus^to 
writer  of  the  book  of  Acts  in  his  own  terms,  and  two  as  taken  ^*^^- 
down  from  Paul's  lips  (ix.  1-7  ;  xxii.  6-10  ;  xxvi.  13-18).     In 
these,  all  that  is  said  to  have  occurred  is  that  a  great  light 
appeared,  and  that  a  voice  came  from  heaven  addressing  Paul, 
and  to  which  he  responded,  and  that  this  voice  proclaimed 
itself  to  be  that  of  "  Jesus  of  Nazareth,"  no  exhibition  of  any 
figure  being  made.      This,  however,  is  held  to  have  amounted 
to   "  the   Lord  Jesus "   having   "  appeared  "  unto  him    (Acts 
ix.  17). 

P. — It  is  singular  that  Jesus  when  in  heaven  should  still 
describe  himself  by  his  earthly  location  of  Nazareth.  Were 
there  others  with  Paul  at  this  time,  and,  if  so,  what  may  be 
their  testimony? 

S. — There  were  persons  with  Paul,  but  it  is  quite  uncertain 
what  they  witnessed.  According  to  one  account  they  saw  the 
light,  but  in  the  others  this  is  not  declared.  Then  in  one  it 
is  said  they  heard  the  voice,  and  in  another  that  they  did  not 
do  so. 

P. — The  whole,  then,  may  have  been  the  result  of  pure 
imagination  on  the  part  of  Paul.  Is  there  anything  in  what  is 
known  of  him  to  negative  such  an  imputation  ? 

8. — On  the  contrary,  he  was  evidently  of  a  highly  excit- 
able and  imaginative  constitution.  He  could  boast  of  frequent 
"  visions  and  revelations  of  the  Lord,"  and  fancied  once  that 
he  had  been  "  caught  up  to  the  third  heaven,"  where  he  "  heard 
unspeakable  words,  which  it  is  not  lawful  for  a  man  to  utter;" 
and  such  had  been  "  the  abundance  of  the  revelations"  made 
to  him,  that  some  physical  infirmity,  which  he  calls  "  a  thorn 


372 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


in  the  flesh,"  or  a  "  messenger  of  Satan,"  was  he  conceived 
imposed  upon  him  to  repress  and  keep  down  exulting  thoughts 
(2  Cor.  xii.  1-7).  He  believed  that  supernatural  communica- 
tions were  made  to  him  to  visit  and  preach  in  Macedonia,  and 
to  prolong  his  ministry  in  Corinth,  and  that  an  angel  from  God 
had  appeared  to  him  to  warn  him  that  he  should  be  brought 
before  Caesar  (Acts  xvi.  9  ;  xviii.  9,  10;  xxvii.  23,  24).  He 
was  more  addicted  than  any  one  to  those  extatic  utterances 
which  were  called  "speaking  with  tongues"  (1  Cor.  xiv.  18). 
And  though  Jesus  had  selected  the  eleven  apostles  as  his 
special  witnesses,  and  these,  with  over  a  hundred  more,  had 
been  miraculously  inspired  at  Pentecost  to  disseminate  his  doc- 
trine, the  boast  of  Paul  was  that  he  had  received  his  instruc- 
tion from  an  independent  source,  "  not  of  men,  neither  by  man, 
but  by  Jesus  Christ,  and  God  the  Father  ;"  and  in  the  assur- 
ance of  this  he  represents  himself  as  proceeding  to  Jerusalem, 
the  head  quarters  of  the  faith,  "  by  revelation,"  to  carry  on  his 
mission. 

P, — Paul  is  evidently  an  unreliable  witness  for  the  super- 
natural. And  as  regards  his  having  been  taught  from  above 
without  human  instrumentality,  what  is  this  but  to  show  the 
unimportance  of  such  a  personal  mission  as  is  attributed  to 
Jesus  ?  Had  such  a  being  as  he  is  described  to  be  been  sent 
from  heaven  to  instruct  and  suffer  for  man  on  earth,  Paul, 
naturally,  would  have  sought  out  those  who  had  been  his 
selected  associates,  and  have  learnt  from  them  all  that  could 
be  known  of  the  divine  master ;  and  if  Paul  could  be  fully 
'empowered  to  preach  the  gospel,  and  to  be  in  fact  the  founder 
of  its  developed  doctrines,  without  such  contact  with  the  wit- 
nesses to  the  career  of  Jesus,  then  the  circumstances  of  that 
career,  and  therewith  the  career  itself,  become  unnecessary. 
If  divine  action  through  the  spirit  was  all  that  was  requisite 
for  the  qualification  of  such  a  man  as  Paul,  others  could  equally 
well,  in  the  same  way,  be  indoctrinated  and  assured,  and  the 
direct  mission  of  Jesus  to  show  forth  the  ways  of  God  might 
be  dispensed  with.  Paul,  I  take  it,  means  it  to  be  under- 
stood, that  what  he  had  experienced  is  the  highest  and  truest 
form  of  teaching,  and  many  here  would  be  disposed  to  agree 
with  him. 

But  to  revert  to  the  physical  resurrection  of  Jesus.     If  Paul 


^ 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


373 


<> 


•i 


could  classify  the  vision  to  himself,  amounting  at  most  to  the 
exhibition  of  a  supernatural  light  and  the  sound  of  a  voice 
from  heaven,  with  those  apparitions  of  Jesus  recounted  in  the 
gospels,  these  latter  may  in  his  idea  have  been  as  devoid  of  a 
real  bodily  presence  as  was  his  own  vision. 

Do  any  of  the  other  writers  of  the  New  Testament,  inde- 
pendent of  the  authors  of  the  gospels,  speak  of  the  nature  of 
the  resurrection  of  Jesus  ? 

S, — There  are  epistles  attributed  to  James,  Peter,  John,  and  Testimony 
Jude,  all  of  whom  were  apostles,  and  present,  as  it  is  said,  when  apostles. 
Jesus  made  his  appearance  ;  but  not  one  of  them  refers  to 
the  occurrence.  Jesus  is  spoken  of  in  the  Apocalypse  as  one 
who  had  been  dead  and  was  alive  again  in  heaven  (i.  5,  18; 
ii.  8),  but  nothing  is  said  of  his  actual  appearance  as  risen  on 
earth,  of  which  the  ostensible  writer  is  declared  to  have  been 
a  witness.  Peter  also  adverts  to  him  as  "  put  to  death  in  the 
flesh,  but  quickened  by  (or  in)  the  spirit,"  by  which  he  also 
went  and  preached  unto  other  "spirits"  who  are  said  to  have 
been  "in  prison"  (I  Pet.  iii.  18),  describing  thus  a  resurrec- 
tion of  a  spiritual,  not  a  physical  order. 

P. — The  being  in  life  again  in  heaven,  all  might  look  for, 
but  this  is  a  difl'erent  thing  from  having  been  put  to  death  in 
the  flesh,  and  quickened  also  in  the  flesh,  as  the  evangelists 
represent. 

It  is  remarkable,  considering  the  important  consequences  Witnesses 
depending  on  accepting  the  fact  of  the  resurrection,  that  the  surrection. 
witnesses  chosen  before  whom  to  display  it  were  just  those 
persons,  of  whom  it  was  said  that  they  had  stolen  away  the 
body,  and  whose  evidence  was  least  likely  to  be  received. 
Why  were  the  manifestations  confined  to  a  few  particular 
friends,  and  not  made  openly  before  those  in  hostility  to 
Jesus,  so  as  to  confound  them,  and  to  secure  a  body  of  testi- 
mony that  would  have  been  above  suspicion  ? 

^. — I  cannot  tell  you.  Jesus  had  certainly,  according  to 
the  evangelists,  boasted  to  the  Jews  that  if  they  destroyed 
the  temple,  meaning  his  body,  he  would  raise  it  up  in  three 
days,  and  he  had  called  them  an  evil  and  adulterous  genera- 
tion, to  whom  no  sign  should  be  given  but  that  of  the  prophet 
Jonas,  explaining  that,  as  Jonas  was  three  days  in  the  whale's 
belly,  so  he  was  to  be  but  three  days  in  his  grave  ;  and  it 
would  be  fair  to  expect  that  he  would  redeem  these  pledges 


374 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


I! 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


375 


The  early 
heresies. 


by  manifesting  himself  on  the  third  day  to  the  objectors  and 
opponents  to  whom  he  so  committed  himself  as  to  the  issue  to 

be  achieved. 

p. Assuredly,  his  not  doing  so  amounts  to  something  very 

like  an  evasion.  Taking  this  into  account,  together  with  the 
silence  of  the  apostolical  epistles  as  to  his  physical  resurrection, 
and  the  discordant  representations  of  the  event  itself  appearing 
later  in  the  gospels,  I  conclude  that  the  doctrine  of  the  phy- 
sical resurrec'tion,  when  offered  for  acceptance,  could  not  have 
been  received  without  considerable  demur. 

^.— From  the  very  outset  of  Christianity  serious  differences 
arose  among  the  Christian  community,  and  the  earliest  of  their 
writings,   which  have   come    down  to  us,  are  in  refutation  of 
what  were  deemed  heresies.      The  heresies  of  course  preceded 
the  efforts  to  rebut  them,  and  therefore  the  first  we  know  of 
the  actual  working  of  Christianity  is  the  prevalence  of  con- 
flicting views  among  those  who  were  its  adherents.      With  the 
outer  world  the  contest  would  be  natural,  but  when  we  see  the 
followers  of  the  system  thus  in  dissension,  it  is  symptomatic  of 
the  landmarks   of  the   faith   not   being  demonstratively   laid 
down.      The  existence  of  serious  contrariety  of  opinion  is  to 
be  traced  even  in  the  apostolic  writings.      There  were  those  in 
the    community    who    were    stigmatized    as    ''false    apostles, 
deceitful  workers"  (2  Cor.  xi.  13),  "false  prophets"  (1  John 
iv     1).      "Beware,"    said    Paul,    "of    dogs,    beware   of  evil 
workers,  beware  of  the  concision"  (Phil.  iii.  2)  ;    "I  would,"  he 
declared,  "they  were  even  cut  off  which  trouble   you"  (Gal. 
V.    12).      "The  learned    have    reckoned    upwards    of   ninety 
different  heresies  which  arose  within  the  first  three  centuries,"  ^ 
and,  very  remarkably,  the  earliest  of  which  we  have  any  know- 
ledge were  in  respect  of  the  nature  of  the  being  of  Jesus,  and, 
prominently,  of  the  actuality  of  his  resurrection.      The  heresies 
of  the  first  century,  says  Mr  Greg,  "  related   almost  exclusively 
to  the  person  and  nature  of  Jesus  ;  on  which  points  we  have 
many  indications  that  great  difference  of  opinion  existed,  even 
during  the  apostolic  period.      The  obnoxious  doctrines  espe- 
cially pointed  out  in  the  (fourth)  gospel  appear— to  be  those 
held  by  Cerinthus  and  the  Nicolaitaus,"  which,  according  to 
Hug,  he  proceeds  to  explain,  viewed  Jesus  as  a  natural  man, 

1  Taylor's  Diegesis,  346. 


J' 


but  endowed   with  an   emanation  from  God  whereby  super- 
human power  was  conferred  upon  him.      This  emanation,  at 
the  period  of  his  sufferings,  "  resumed  his  separate  existence, 
abandoned  Jesus  to  pain  and  death,  and  soared  upwards  to  his 
native  heaven.      Cerinthus   distinguished    Jes^is   and    Christ, 
Jesus  and  the  Son  of  God,  as  beings  of  different  nature  and 
dignity.    The  Nicolaitans  held  similar  doctrines." ^    "  Ignatius," 
observes     Mr     Hennell,     "had     been     asserting     with    some 
vehemence  that  Jesus  Christ  suffered  upon  the  cross  really,  or 
in  the  flesh,  apparently  in  opposition  to  the  Corinthian  heresy, 
that  the  divine  soul  or  Christ  left  the  body  of  Jesus  to  suffer 
iu  appearance  only.      To  make  his  point  still  stronger,  he  says 
that  he  knows  that  even  after  his  resurrection  he  was  still  in 
the  flesh.    The  Corinthian  heresy,  that  the  Christ  or  divine  soul 
of  the  Saviour  had  a  separate  existence  from  the  human  being 
Jesus,   and    left  him  at  the  crucifixion,   would  give  peculiar 
interest  to  all  legends  asserting  his  corporeal  nature  after  his 
resurrection,   and  might  occasion  some  of  them."^     "  Theo- 
doret  informs  us  of  Cerinthus,  who  was  contemporary  with  the 
apostle  John  and  his  followers,  that  he  held  and  taught  that 
Christ  (i.e.,  Jesus)  suffered  and  was  crucified,  but  that  he  did 
not  rise   from   the  tomb ;   but  that  he  will  rise  when  there 
shall  be  a  general  resurrection.      Philaster  says  of  him  that  he 
taught — that  Christ  was  not  yet  risen  from  the  dead,  only  he 
announces  that  he  will  rise."^     Dr  Lardner  (IV.  368)  is  also 
cited  for  this  view  of  the  doctrine  of  Cerinthus.* 

Cerinthus,  as  has  been  seen,  was  of  the  apostolic  age,  and 
the  Nicolaitans,  who  held  similar  views,  were  so  likewise, 
being  referred  to  by  name  in  Rev.  ii.  6.  At  this  early  period, 
then,  the  fact  of  the  resurrection  was  disputed.  "  The  preva- 
lent opinion  amongst  the  early  Christian  converts — was,"  says 
Mosheim  (I.  136),  "that  Christ  existed  in  a^^jpearance  only, 
and  not  in  reality,  and  that  his  body  was  a  mere  phantom. 
Dr  Priestly,  in  his  Church  History  (I.  97),  confirms  this  state- 
ment." ^  "  In  the  gospel  of  the  apostle  Barnabas,  it  is  expli- 
citly asserted,  that  Jesus  Christ  was  not  crucified,  but  that  he 

1  The  Creed  of  Christendom,  127,  128.    ^  Hennell's  Works,  187,  188,  note. 
3  Taylor's  Diegesis,  354.  *  Immortality  of  the  Soul,  E.  Cooper,  39. 

'  Idem,  40. 


T'fl*'" 


•™»1, 


«76 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


377 


was  taken  up  into  the  third  heaven  by  the  ministry  of  four 
angels,  Gabriel,  Michael,  Raphael,  and  Uriel  ;  that  he  should 
not  die  till  the  very  end  of  the  world,  and  that  it  was  Judas 
Iscariot  who  was  crucified  in  his  stead." ^  Archbishop  Wake's 
Apostolic  Fathers  is  referred  to  by  Mr  Cooper  for  a  like  state- 
ment of  the  doctrine  of  PauFs  companion  Barnabas.  *'  Basi- 
lides,  a  man  so  ancient  that  he  boasted  to  follow  Glaucias  as 
his  master,  who  was  the  disciple  of  St  Peter,  taught  that 
Christ  was  NOT  crucified  :  but  that  a  metamorphosis  took 
place  between  him  and  Simon,  the  Cyrenian,  who  was  cruci- 
fied in  his  stead,  while  Jesus  stood  by  and  mocked  at  the 
mistake  of  the  Jews."  ^  "  The  Ebionites,"  says  Dr  Hug,  in 
his  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  "  a  numerous  body  of 
early  christians,  denied  the  miraculous  conception  of  Christ, 
and,  with  the  Nazarenes,  looked  upon  him  only  as  an  ordinary 
man.  They  also  denied  that  he  sutfered  on  the  cross,  and 
asserted  that  he  had  flown  away  to  heaven."^  The  book  of 
the  acts  or  journeys  of  the  apostles  Peter,  John,  Thomas,  and 
Paul,  taught  that  Christ  only  appeared  as  a  man,  and  took 
various  forms,  his  head  sometimes  reaching  to  the  clouds,  and 
that  another  was  crucified  in  his  stead.  The  gospel  of  the 
Helkesaites,  of  about  A.D.  114,  said  he  was  a  certain  power 
whose  height  was  sixty-six  miles.*  *' The  Docetae — were 
willing  to  get  over  the  difficulty  of  a  dying  god,  by  their 
doctrine  of  apparitions.  They  said  that  Jesus  died  only  in 
appearance,  and  hence  their  name  of  Docetae,  or  seemers."^ 
Tertullian  speaks  of  this  heresy  existing  in  the  time  of  the 
apostles.^  *'  While  the  apostles  were  yet  on  earth,  nay,  while 
the  blood  of  Christ  was  still  recent  on  mount  Calvary,  the 
body  of  Christ  was  asserted  to  be  a  mere  phantom."  ^  Mr 
Taylor  specifies  several  in  succession  who  were  of  this  way  of 
thinking.  Cerdon,  referred  to  by  Dr  Lardner,  held  that 
"  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ  was  not  born  of  a  virgin,  nor  did 
appear  at  all  in  the  flesh,  nor  had  he  descended  from  heaven  ; 

1  Taylor's  Diegesis,  353,  quoting  Toland's  Nazarenus,  I.  5.  17. 

*  Taylor's  Syntagma,  110,  quoting  Pearson  on  the  Creed,  II.  249. 

*  R.  Cooper's  Lectures  on  the  Bible,  117. 

*  Taylor's  Sjnitagma,  110,  quoting  Jones  on  the  Canon,  I.  12,  226. 

*  Sharpe's  Egyptian  Mythology,  99.  •  Taylor's  Diegesis.  348. 
'  Taylor's  Diegesis,  348,  quoting  Cotelerius  Patres  Apostol.,  II.  24. 


but  that  he  was  seen  by  men  only  putatively,  that  is,  they 
fancied  they  saw  him,  but  did  not  see  him  in  reality,  for  he 
was  only  a  shadow y  and  seemed  to  sufifer,  but  in  reality  did 
not  suffer  at  all.  Marcion  of  Pontus,  A.D.  127,  the  successor 
of  Cerdon — was  so  far  from  believing  that  our  Saviour  was 
born  of  a  virgin,  that  he  did  not  allow  that  he  had  ever  been 
born  at  all.  He  maintained  that  the  son  of  God  took  the 
exterior  form  of  a  man,  and  appeared  as  a  man,  but  without 
being  born,  or  gradually  growing  up  to  the  full  stature  of  a 
man  :  he  had  showed  himself  at  once  in  Galilee,  completely 
equipped  for  his  divine  mission,  and  immediately  assumed  the 
character  of  a  saviour."  Lucian,  A.D.  143,  "one  of  the  most 
eminent  forgers  of  sacred  legends  of  the  second  century,"  says 
that  the  apostle  John,  "attempting  to  touch  the  body  of 
Christ,  perceived  no  hardness  of  the  flesh,  and  met  with  no 
resistance  from  it,  but  thrust  his  hand  into  the  inner  part." 
Appelles,  A.D.  160,  a  disciple  of  Marcion,  but  seceding  from 
him,  "maintained  that  Christ  was  not  an  appearance  only,  but 
had  flesh  really,  though  not  derived  from  the  Virgin  Mary, 
for  as  he  descended  from  the  supercelestial  places  to  this  earth 
he  collected  to  himself  a  body  out  of  the  four  elements. 
Having  thus  formed  to  himself  a  corporeity,  he  really  appeared 
in  this  world,  and  taught  men  the  knowledge  of  heavenly 
things."  In  this  flesh  Apelles  held  that  he  suffered,  but 
threw  it  off  as  he  ascended  to  heaven.  Faustus  also  denied 
that  Christ  was  born.^ 

Another  heresy  that  soon  sprung  up  was  the  denial  of  the 
divinity  of  Jesus.  "Those,"  continues  Mr  Taylor,  "who 
denied  the  humanity  of  Christ  were  the  first  class  of  professing 
Christians,  and  not  only  first  in  order  of  time,  but  in  dignity 
of  character,  in  intelligence,  and  in  moral  influence.  Those 
who  denied  the  divinity,  were  the  second,  and  in  every  sense 
a  less  philosophical  and  less  important  body."^ 

These  controversies  were  authoritatively  pronounced  upon  at 
the  council  of  Nicaea,  assembled  by  Constantine,  A.D.  325, 
where  the  nature  and  being  of  Jesus,  as  the  God-man,  were 
decided  on  and  declared  by  vote. 

Taking  the   accounts   of  Matthew,   Mark,   and  Luke,  the  Founda- 
career  of  Jesus  was  short  and  obscure.      Ostensibly  of  humble  history. 


Taylor's  Diegesis,  349-351. 


*  Idem,  352. 


378 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


379 


Existence 
of  the 
heresies 
disclosed 
in  the 
scripture, 


parentage,  he  was  not  known  beyond  his  own  neighbourhood, 
till  his  "last  few  days,  when  he  suffered,  as  a  disturber  of  the 
public  peace,  at  Jerusalem.     He  courted  notice  only  during 
the  last  year  of  his  life.     The  region  in  which  he  moved  was 
peopled  by  an  ignorant  and  barbaric  race,  with  the  lowest  of 
whom  he  habitually  associated,  being  accounted  the  friend  of 
publicans  and  sinners,  and  having  mostly  poor  fishermen   as 
his  chosen  companions  and  disciples.     If  there  is  any  reality 
in  his  history,  it  is  out  of  materials  such  as  these  that  the 
representations  of  him,  as  the  expected  Messiah,  had  to  be 
worked  out.      Viewing  him  as  a  God-man,  it  would  have  been 
interesting  to  know   how  such   a  being  passed  through  the 
stages  of  infancy  and  adolescence,  eras  the  type  of  which  is  a 
struggle  onwards  out  of  helplessness,  ignorance,  and  physical 
infirmity  or  insufficience.     But  here  the  historians  preserve  a 
prudent  silence,  launching  him  into  action  at  the  mature  age 
of  thirty.     Two  of  them,  Mark  and  John,  do  not  even  attempt 
to  account  for  his  birth,  but  introduce  him  only  at  this  time, 
when  he  is  first  brought  to  public  view  at  his  meeting  with 
John  at  the  Jordan.     It  was  comparatively  easy,  at  such  a 
time  of  life,  in  an  age  when  knowledge  was  scant  and  difficult 
of  circulation,  to  ascribe  to  the  subject  of  the  narrative  those 
attributes,  powers,  and  manifestations  in  action,  which  would 
show  him  to  be  superhuman,  and  therefore,  as  it  would  then 
be  understood,  divine,  and  to  shape  events  suitable  to  illustrate 
such  a  representation.    The  allegation  that  he  wrought  miracles, 
uttered  prophecy,  and  rose  from  the  dead,  would  be  supports 
readily  suggesting  themselves.      The  ignorant,  prone  to  accept 
the  statements  of  others  without   sifting,  and  greedy  of  the 
marvellous,  would  receive  what  was  said  with  little  hesitation, 
and  propagate  and  enforce  the  belief  in  their  respective  circles. 
The  better  instructed  and  reflective  would  question  the  realities 
of  the   facts   alleged,  and  endeavour  to  account  for  them  in 
some  manner  doing  the  least  violence  to  their  perceptions. 
And  hence  the  heresies  that  occurred. 

It  is  said  to  have  been  a  satisfaction  to  Jesus  that  his  doc- 
trine was  such  as  to  commend  itself  to  the  "  babes  "  in  know- 
ledge, but  to  be  unsuited  to  "  the  wise  and  prudent "  (Matt, 
ii.  25)  ;  and  in  the  like  spirit  Paul,  conscious  that  the  opposi- 
tion came  from  the  better  informed,  of  a  purpose  set  at  naught 


k\ 


all  the  resources  of  human  learning.  God,  he  '■eP^e.^nted  dis- 
couraging mental  culture,  had  chosen  "the  foolish  things 
of  th^  world  to  confound  the  wise,"  and  the  acquisitions  of 
"science"  and  "  philosophy "  were  therefore  to  be  put  aside 
and  accounted  as  "profane  and  vain  babUings  (1  Cor.  i. 
1 7-29  ;  ii.  1-8  ;  iii.  18-21  ;  Col.  ii.  8  ;  1  Tim.  vi.  20) 

The  efforts  made  in  the  apostolic  epistles  to  enforce  the  real 
doctrine,  serve  to  disclose  the  character  of  the  opposmg  views 
which  had  to  be  refuted.      The  corporeal  nature  of  Je.us  wa^ 
disputed.     To  this  it  was  said,  .■  Every  spirit  that  confesseth 
that  Jesus  Christ  is  come  in  the  flesh  is  of  God  :  and  every 
spirit   that  confesseth  not  that  Jesus  Christ  is  come  in  the 
flesh  is  not  of  God  "  (1  John  iv.  2,  3).     It  -^"^ J  ^^^^ ^^^^^^f 
matter  to  allow  the  human  nature  of  any  man      The  earnest- 
ness with  which  it  was  demanded  to  allow  this  of  Jesus,  is 
comprehensible  when  we  find  that  he  was  taken  to  be  a  mere 
phantom.      "  The  word  was  made  flesh,  and  dwelt  among  us 
fJohn  i  1 4)      "God  was  manifest  in  the  flesh    (1  Tim.  in.  lb). 
This  wa^  the  position  it  was  sought  to  uphold  in  its  complete- 
ness     The  actualities  of  the  crucifixion  were  misrepresented, 
and  some  said  that  another,  whether  Judas  or  Simon  of  Cyrene, 
who  bore  his  cross,  had    suffered   in   substitution  for   Jesus. 
Paul,  apparently  in  view  of  these  heresies,  said,  emphatically, 
"  I  determined  not  to  know  any  thing  among  you,  save  Jesus 
Christ,  and  him  crucified"  (1  Cor.  ii.  2).      "We  preach  Christ 
crucified,  unto  the    Jews  a  stumbling   block,  and   unto   the 
Greeks  foolishness  "  (1  Cor.  i.  23).     Belief  in  the  bare  fact  of 
a  crucifixion  could  in  itself  involve  no  sense  of  foolishness^     It 
was  the  idea  of  a  divine  personage  being  subjected  to  death 
that  the  cultivated  minds  resented  as  foolish,  and  it  was  thK 
sort  of  disbelief  that  Paul  was  combating.    "0  foolish  Galatians, 
he  exclaimed,  "  who  hath  bewitched  you,  that  ye  should  not 
obey  the  truth,  before  whose  eyes  Jesus  Christ  hath  been  evi- 
dently set  forth,  crucified  among  you"  (Gal.  in.  1).      -^/le  re- 
surrection was  either  explained  away  or  denied,  and  this  had 
to  be  maintained  as  an  ax:tual  occurrence.      "Now  if  Chnst  be 
preached  that  he  rose  from  the  dead,  how  say  some  among  you 
that  there  is  no  resurrection  of  the  dead"  (1  Cor.  xv.  1.). 
This  was  not  addressed  to  the  outside  world,  who  had  m  no 
sense  accepted  Jesus.     It  is  the  congregation  at  Corinth,  per- 


880 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  JESUS. 


381 


The  open- 
ing for 
fictitious 
rej^rescn- 
tations. 


sons  ''called  to  be  saints,"  who  are  in  question,  "among  whom," 
in  view  doubtless  of  the  difficulties  involved  in  the  creed  offered 
to  them,  the  fact  of  any  such  resurrection  as  that  said  to  have 
occurred  in  the  instance  of  Jesus  was  questioned.  Others  again 
held,  in  some  way,  that  "the  resurrection  is  past  already"  (2  Tim. 
ii.  18).  "  Remember,"  says  the  same  preacher,  "that  Jesus 
Christ  of  the  seed  of  David  was  raised  from  the  dead  according 
to  my  gospel "  (ver.  8.)  The  endeavour  of  the  evangelists  to 
establish  this  resurrection,  as  a  physical  fact,  in  the  face  of  the 
surrounding  attempts  to  qualify  the  reality  of  its  character,  is 
obvious  enough.  It  is  hence  that  they  introduce  the  flesh,  the 
bones,  and  the  wounds  of  Jesus,  and  furthermore  humanize  the 
apparition  by  making  him  partake  of  material  food.  But  in 
their  aim  at  the  marvellous  they  fall,  as  might  be  expected, 
into  inconsistencies.  The  apparition,  notwithstanding  that  it 
is  composed  of  such  solid  substances,  passes  through  closed 
doors,  and  vanishes  as  ether,  and  though  representing  the  very 
person  of  Jesus,  it  is  not  recognised  by  those  who  were  intimate 
with  him,  and  had  seen  him  but  three  days  before  in  life. 

P. — The  existence  of  such  strange  views  of  the  being  and 
person  of  Jesus,  maintained  by  those  living  so  close  upon  his 
times,  shows  that  no  real  historical  materials  respecting  him 
could  then  have  been  currently  at   command.      Of  a  known 
personage,  with  whom  multitudes  were  familiar,  it  never  could 
have  been  said,  shortly  after  he  passed  away,  that  he  had  been 
a  phantom,  that  he  had  suffered  in  appearance  only,  that  he 
had  metamorphosed  himself,  that  his  head  at  times  reached 
the  clouds  or  to  a  height  of  many  miles.    It  is  evident,  if  there 
were  such  a  person  as  Jesus,  that  his  life  had  come  so  little 
under  the  observation  of  his  fellow-men  that  out  of  his  own 
immediate  circle  anything,  in  those   days  of  ignorance   and 
superstition,  could  be  said  of  him,  and  be  believed.      While 
therefore  heresies,  such  as  you  describe,  might  spring  up  in  or 
about  the  alleged  field  of  his  operations,  it  is  also  clear  that 
ideal  histories,  ascribing  to  him  a  supernatural  birth  and  mira- 
culous powers,  such  as  appear  in  the  writings  of  the  evangelists, 
might  be  framed  and  fall  into  circulation  with  equal  facility. 
The  solid  framework  of  a  known  actual  life  being  wanting  as  a 
governing  element,  there  has  been   liberty  for  the  fancy  to 
depict  its  object  in  any  form,  or  with  any  hue,  that  the  ima- 


I 


i 


gination  might  suggest.  What  surprises  me  is  that  among 
enlightened  people  of  modem  days  the  marvels  related  of  Jesus 
in  the  gospels  should  receive  unhesitating  acceptance. 

^._They  would  not  be  so  received,  it  may  be  confidently  How«.^^ 
asserted,  were  they  not  presented  in  a  volume  which  is  accounted  thehi^ 
to  be  the  word  of  God.     The  idea  that  the  book,  m  some  way     -«-«'• 
or  other,  is  of  divine  origin,  lets  in  all  its  contents  without  a 
question.     That  such  is  the  nature  of  the  book,  people  are 
taucrht  from  the  earliest  dawn  of  their  intelligence,  and  being 
ascribed  to  divine  authority,  it  becomes  profanity  to  treat  it 
as  you  would  any  other  book.     To  investigate  its  statements 
amounts  to  entertaining  the  doubt  whether  these  statements 
are  reliable  or  otherwise,  and  this  is  to  be  repelled  as  mcipient 
infidelity      One  supports  the  other  in  unquestioning  faith,  and 
paid  ministrations,   operating  with  the  sensible  advantage  of 
conforming  to  prevailing  tenets,  bind  all  together  in  undisturbed 
confidence.     The  ancient   record  is  considered   to  have   been 
miraculously  preserved,  in  testimony  against  themselves   by 
those  hostile  to  the  faith.     This  is  the  r61e  the  Jews  fulfil. 
The  history  of  the  canon  is  commonly  unknown.     What  comes 
under  the  head  of  Moses  is  held  to  have  been  derived  actually 
from  Moses.     The  same  as  to  the  Christian  writings.      The 
gospels  of  Matthew  and  John  are  from  the  actual  companions 
of  Jesus,  and  these  are  supported  by  other  inspired  contempor- 
aneous records.    The  hollowness  of  the  pretensions  of  the  Jews 
to  be  the  chosen  people  of  God  is  not  suspected.     It  is  not  seen 
by  what  wrenchings  their  records  have  been  apphed  to  the 
support  of  the  Christian  narratives.     Nor  are  the  inconsisten- 
cies of  the  latter  more  than  glanced  at.      Often  they  are  wholly 
unobserved.     The  theme  they  are  occupied  with  is  too  solemn, 
and  too  sacred,  to  be  desecrated  with  investigation.      What 
warps  a  man's  mind,  efi'ectually  overpowers   it,  and  here  the 
very  exercise  of  reason  is  considered  to  be  fatal  to  true  per- 
ceptions. 

Happily  from  this  enslavement  of  the  understanding  we  are 
becdnning  to  be  set  free.  The  means  of  judgment  have  mul- 
tiplied upon  us,  and  therewith  the  liberty  of  judging  has  been 
used  And  with  the  great  testimony  that  God  ever  gives  of 
himself  in  the  action  of  his  laws,  as  operating  physicaUy,  men- 
tally, and  spiritually,  the  end  of  the  reign  of  human  represen- 
tations of  him  may,  with  confidence,  be  awaited. 


JL^ 


EDINBURGH: 
FEINTED   BY  IDENBULL  AND  SPEAES. 


